Supreme Court grants bail to Vyapam Scam whistleblower Anand Rai 

Rai in his plea had argued that though he had joined the event but was not present at the site where the alleged incident had taken place. 
A view of the Supreme Court in New Delhi. (File Photo)
A view of the Supreme Court in New Delhi. (File Photo)

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on SC grants bail to Dr. Anand Rai the whistleblower in the Vyapam scam, who was arrested in a case over alleged violence during a dharna organised by Jai Adiwasi Yuva Shakti. 

Considering the period of spent by him

in custody, a bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha granted Rai bail subject to imposition of terms and conditions by the Trial Court.

“Man is ophthalmologist. He’s a whistleblower in Vyapam scam. How long will we keep him in jail now?” CJI DY Chandrachud remarked. 

“Having regard to period of custody, we are of view that petitioners is released on bail subject to terms and conditions by Trial Court,” bench said in its order. 

Rai had preferred the plea against MP HCs December 12, 2022 ruling wherein the HC while refusing to release him for offence u/s 14A(2) of SC and ST Act, 1989. Rai was arrested on November 15, 2022 while he was returning back to Indore. 

Rai in his plea had argued that though he had joined the event but was not present at the site where the alleged incident had taken place. 

“It is nobody's case that the Petitioner is involved in stone pelting or has hurled casteist abuses against any member of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe. It is hard to believe that the complainant who is alleged to have been walking behind the cavalcade was able to identify name 19 protestors with their names and address,” the plea had said. 

For Rai, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, also told the bench  that he was kept in solitary confinement during the period of custody. 

Refuting Sibal’s submissions and opposing his bail, MP government in the plea had said  that Rai’s statement that he was not at all present at the place of occurrence is also a false statement and completely contrary to record. “There is cogent and compelling material on record to establish the presence of Petitioner at the place of occurrence and his participation in the offence,” MP in the affidavit had said. 

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com