The Supreme Court on Wednesday postponed the hearing on advocate Surendra Gadling’s bail application in the 2016 Surajgarh iron ore mine arson case, scheduled to be heard again on December 18.
The decision came after the Maharashtra government requested more time, citing the need to translate several vernacular documents for the case.
During the brief hearing, senior advocate Anand Grover, representing Gadling, emphasized that his client has been incarcerated for nearly six years, urging the court to consider expediting the matter. In response, the bench, comprising Justices M.M. Sundresh and Aravind Kumar, granted the state government two weeks to submit additional documentation.
The case stems from a violent incident on December 25, 2016, when Maoist rebels allegedly set fire to 76 vehicles used for transporting iron ore from the Surajgarh mines in Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli district. Gadling is accused of providing support to the Maoists, allegedly working in close association with them and conspiring with various co-accused, some of whom are still on the run.
In January 2023, the Bombay High Court’s Nagpur bench denied Gadling’s bail, asserting that the evidence against him appeared to be prima facie credible. He faces charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The prosecution claims Gadling provided sensitive government information, including maps, to Maoist groups. It is also alleged that he encouraged local communities to oppose the operations at the Surajgarh mines, thereby inciting them to join the Maoist movement.
In addition to the Surajgarh arson case, Gadling is implicated in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case, which revolves around the controversial Elgar Parishad event held in Pune on December 31, 2017.
The police allege that inflammatory speeches made during this event led to the violent clashes that broke out the following day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial, resulting in multiple casualties.
Gadling’s bail plea is being closely watched, with both his legal team and the prosecution awaiting the court’s decision on whether he will be granted temporary release amid the ongoing legal battles surrounding these high-profile cases.
