KOCHI: The NIA Court discussed threadbare all 12 types of evidence against Alan Shuhaib and Thwaha Fasal, the two youths arrested last November under terror charges, and found not even one to be sufficient enough to deny them bail.The lengthy verdict — it contained 64 pages — pronounced on Wednesday examined every charge invoked against the two accused youngsters.
The court observed that a number of persons are attracted to Maoist philosophy because of the oppression of the weaker section which they might have witnessed in the social setup. “It is impossible to treat them as members of a terrorist organisation or liable for punishment for having faith in such a philosophy or sympathy towards people spreading such a philosophy,” the court said.The NIA Court judge, Anil K Bhaskar, categorised evidence in 12 parts.
These include pamphlets and writings seized from the accused, participation of the accused in programmes conducted by frontal organisation of CPI (Maoist), banners prepared by the accused, literature seized from the accused, writings supporting forces in Jammu and Kashmir who are attempting to destabilise India and files with code languages.
One of the key observations by the court was regarding the banners soliciting support for the freedom struggle of Jammu and Kashmir, opposing the control of the Indian government there and fighting against the ‘Hindu Brahmin fascist government’ seized from Thwaha. “It is to be taken note that these banners were prepared in the aftermath of the abrogation of Article 370 and 35 (A) of the Constitution by the Parliament. Any evaluation diverted from the context will lead to bad conclusion,” the court said.
Adding to it, the court observed that protesting against government policies even if it is for a wrong cause cannot be termed as sedition. The right to protest is guaranteed by the Constitution. “A contextual evaluation of the objectionable writing does not prima facie prove any attempt to create any hatred or contempt to the Government of India, nor does it excite disaffection,” the court observed.
Similarly, on the seizure of a notice titled ‘People should rise against Maoist hunt’, it said, “A perusal of the notice prima facie does not indicate any attempt to excite people to violently protest against the government. By this notice, people were not called upon to support the CPI(Maoist) movement but only to protest against the government action which they claimed to be wholly unjust,” the verdict said.
KEY OBSERVATIONS
People are attracted to Maoist philosophy due to oppression of weaker sections
Impossible to treat them as members of terrorist organisation
Right to protest is guaranteed by the Constitution.
Chennithala hails bail
T’Puram: Opposition Leader Ramesh Chennithala has hailed the bail granted to Alan and Thwaha. He said the duo has been victims of CPM’s double stand. While CPM at the national level was against slapping of UAPA, it supported the law when it came to power in the state.