A Delhi court has sought a report from Tihar Jail Superintendent on a plea by Maoist ideologue Kobad Ghandy, facing trial for allegedly trying to set up a base of banned outfit CPI (Maoist) here, regarding his production in another case in a Telangana court.
Additional Sessions Judge Reetesh Singh asked the Jail Superintendent to file the report by May 24. Ghandhy said in his application that he was required to be produced before the concerned court at Telangana where another case against him is pending.
He has also filed a plea urging that his further presence in the Delhi court be dispensed with till pronouncement of the judgment in this case which is at its final stage.
The court has put up the application for consideration on on May 24, the next date of hearing.
Meanwhile, the court fixed the case for commencing final arguments here.
“List the matter for final arguments on May 24,” it said.
A report has also been called by the judge from incharge of Patiala House Courts lock-up on a plea of co-accused Rajinder Kumar seeking directions to the lock-up incharge not to produce him in court in handcuffs.
Both the accused are presently in judicial custody.
65-year-old Ghandy is facing trial in the case for alleged offences punishable under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and various provisions of the IPC.
The court had earlier framed charges against co-accused Rajender Kumar under various sections of the IPC in the case.
Ghandy, an alumnus of the prestigious Doon School and St Xavier’s College Mumbai, is facing prosecution in around 20 criminal and terror cases in different parts of the country.
According to the police, he was said to be part of the top leadership of erstwhile CPI-ML (People’s War Group) since 1981.
He allegedly continued as a Central Committee member in CPI (Maoist) after the merger with People’s War Group and was elected to the Maoist Politburo in 2007.
Ghandy was arrested by Special Cell of Delhi Police for allegedly trying to set up a base for CPI (Maoist) in Delhi.
He was earlier absolved by the court of terror charges due to want of proper sanction. Later, a fresh charge sheet was filed with another sanction for his prosecution under the provisions of UAPA. Thereafter, he was charged with offences under the UAPA.
( Source – PTI )
