Bail requests filed Monday by Arnab Goswami, Neetish Sarda and Firoz Shaikh will also be heard on Thursday, the session court said, but the state will present its responses on Wednesday, the court said. On Tuesday, Goswami filed a motion with the Supreme Court against the Bombay High Court’s rejection of his request for provisional bail.
Alibaug’s chief judicial magistrate had rejected the police’s request for police custody last Wednesday (November 4) and had sent the trio into judicial custody until November 18. Two days later, the Alibaug magistrate allowed the police to interrogate the three in judicial custody for three hours a day.
Session judge RG Malashetti on Tuesday rejected a statement by Sarda’s lawyer, Vijay Aggarwal, on the maintainability of the review statement and heard the police request on the merits. Special prosecutor Pradeep Gharat said that the preventive detention order is based entirely on the grounds that the summary closure report ‘A’ was accepted, but with the HC also saying that without notice to the plaintiff, it cannot be, the foundation will retirement. He said the police are entitled to custody of the trio to carry out a custody questioning, which is hampered by the magistrate’s order.
Goswami’s lawyer, Aabad Ponda, argued that the pretrial detention order of Alibaug’s chief judicial magistrate was “well reasoned” and therefore, as held by the apex courtUnless there is “patent wickedness”, you cannot interfere with a petition for review.
Ponda argued that a court custody order, “unless it is palpably wrong or demonstrably wicked,” cannot be overturned simply because two points of view are possible. A police custody order requires reasons, he said, adding that police “have not pointed out any illegality” in Magistrate Sunayna Pingale’s order. Aggarwal also objected to the declaration of police custody, saying that the magistrate’s order “is perfectly valid” and that the case of the three was not linked to each other. There was no common intention, he said.
Defender Neha Raut, who appeared on behalf of Shaikh’s relatives, objected to the police statement, citing aspects of the case and saying it was closed. Karan Kadam, Sarda’s lawyer, said Sarda has been cooperating with the police investigation the entire time.
.
