Two years before his death, when the Maharashtra police threatened to arrest ex- Bombay High Court Justice Hosbet Suresh in 2018, he remained unfazed.
“Those who speak against the atrocities of the government are silenced. Many people today are criticising the government in large numbers, so how do you silence them? This is how. They are misusing wrong laws to arrest and confine them,” he told Sabrang India in an interview.
Little did Justice Suresh know then that this would continue long after he was gone.
Earlier this month, an FIR registered by the Telangana Police in 2022, naming Justice Suresh and 151 others, surfaced.
Those named in the FIR, filed under several sections of the UAPA, Arms Act and The Indian Penal Code (IPC) also included one other person who was dead and three of the Bhima Koregaon accused - Sudha Bharadwaj, Arun Fereirra and Surendra Gadling.
“Unknown leaders, army sabs, militia sabs and banned Maoist party working against the government with the intention to kill the politicians, policemen and take over the power of the democratically elected government at gunpoint,” the FIR alleged.
But legal experts, in conversation with The Quint, pointed out several glaring loopholes in the way the FIR was registered.
So, what else does the FIR say? Why do legal experts think that this FIR is fraught with loopholes? The Quint answers.
‘The FIR Doesn’t Even Do The Bare Minimum…’
According to the FIR accessed by The Quint, the complainant reportedly received a tip-off about an “illegal gathering” of members from the CPI (Maoist) in Telangana on 19 August, 2022.
Acting on this information, a team of police officers reached the alleged meeting spot and encountered armed individuals dressed in olive green uniforms, who were identified as members of the banned CPI (Maoist) party. The officers ordered them to surrender, but they reportedly escaped into the dense forest.
During a search operation of the same spot, the police said they found “prohibited” Maoist literature. This is when the names of Justice Suresh, Bhima Koregaon accused (Gadling, Ferreira, Bharadwaj), eminent professors and 104 others emerged.
“The FIR is absolutely baffling – it does not specify who is accused of what – there are 152 people mentioned but there are no details. While an FIR is not supposed to have all the facts related to a case and is only the first step, this FIR does not even do the bare minimum of specifying a crime.
You can’t just mention names and say that they are suspects. You have to at least describe why they did what,” John noted.
Is Membership of a Civil Society Group 'Prohibited?'
Meanwhile, The Hindu reported that as the police went through the “prohibited” Maoist literature, they retrieved an old letterhead of the Indian Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL), which Justice Suresh formerly headed. That is how his name found his way to the FIR.
‘Filing a Case Against Dead People is a Dead End’
As has been pointed out above, the FIR was filed against Justice Suresh two years after he died in 2020. Another person named in the FIR died in 2021.
“While it is not against the law to mention people who are dead in an FIR for the sake of completion of facts, the case against them can’t progress. It is a dead end. And in this particular case, there are no facts, there are no details — Then, what were the police doing filing an FIR against those who are no longer alive?” John questioned.
‘Nobody Knew,’ But Should They Have?
While the FIR was filed in August 2022, people mentioned in the FIR did not find out until earlier this month.
It came to light only on 15 June, when the bail petition of People’s Democratic Movement (PDM) president Chandramouli was being heard in another case. While opposing the bail plea, the police informed the district court that Chandramouli was involved in several other cases. When the court directed the officials concerned to furnish all FIRs filed against him, the police presented an FIR that named 152 individuals as accused under various sections, including the UAPA.
Speaking to the media, Professor Hargopal, a retired dean of the School of Social Science at the University of Hyderabad, and one of the people named in the FIR said that he had no idea about the case until it came up in Chandramouli’s case.
“We had no prior knowledge. This came as a surprise to us. We were not aware of it 10 months ago. It came up in some other cases. The court inquired about the number of cases against him (Chandramouli), and the police revealed that he has been booked in other cases. That’s when this particular case involving 152 people came to light,” Prof Haragopal told SouthFirst.
Police To ‘Drop’ Cases: But Can That Happen Immediately?
As soon as people found out about the FIR, there was a massive uproar. Following the public criticism, the Telangana government instructed the police to look into it.
Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao directed Director General of Police (DGP) Anjani Kumar to withdraw the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) slapped against Prof Haragopal and 5 others (Padmaja Shaw, V Raghunath, Gaddam Laxman, Gunti Ravinder and Suresh Kumar.)
Speaking to the media right after this, Mulugu Superintendent of Police Gaush Alam said that “a memo is being filed in court with a request for deletion of their names from the case.”
Experts, however, said that a case can be 'dropped' only after due process has been followed.
“A case can’t be dropped unless there has been an investigation in the case to show that there is no prosecutable material against those accused. It can’t be dropped right away,” Human Rights lawyer Mihir Desai said.
When The Quint reached out to SP Alam on Thursday, 29 June, he said that the police are yet to file the memo.
“We are waiting on some legal advice," he said.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)