Elgar Parishad case: HC grants bail to ex-DU professor Hany Babu after nearly six years in custody

The Bombay High Court granted bail to former professor Hany Babu after over five years in custody, citing prolonged pre-trial detention.

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Thursday granted bail to former Delhi University professor Hany Babu, accused in the Elgar Parishad–Bhima Koregaon case, citing his prolonged pre-trial incarceration of five years and seven months.

Elgar Parishad case: HC grants bail to ex-DU professor Hany Babu after nearly six years in custody

Babu, an English literature professor, was arrested on April 14, 2020, and has remained in custody since. He moved the court in June 2024 challenging earlier orders, first by the NIA court refusing him bail in 2022, and then by the high court upholding that refusal, arguing that he had been detained for an unconstitutionally long period without trial. His plea was filed through advocate Yug Mohit Chaudhry.

The NIA has accused Babu of being part of a larger conspiracy linked to the Elgar Parishad event on December 31, 2017, where allegedly inflammatory speeches were delivered, triggering violence the next day near the Koregaon Bhima war memorial, in which one person died and several were injured.

Chaudhry argued that Babu has no prior criminal record, and that his discharge application has remained pending for over three years without a response from the prosecution. With the voluminous evidence and the slow pace of proceedings, the trial is unlikely to conclude for years, he submitted, adding that prolonged incarceration had itself become grounds for bail.

Opposing the plea, additional solicitor general Anil C Singh and advocate Chintan Shah contended that the length of custody alone should not justify bail. They argued that Babu had “not yet undergone 50% of the sentence” applicable if convicted, and that parity could not be claimed since other co-accused granted bail had spent over six years in jail.

However, the division bench of justices AS Gadkari and Ranjitsinha R Bhonsale disagreed. Noting that co-accused Sudhir Dhawale and Rona Wilson had been granted bail on the ground of prolonged pre-trial detention, the court held that Babu was similarly entitled to parity. It also recorded that more than nine accused in the case have now been enlarged on bail.

Relying on the Supreme Court’s judgement in Legal Aid Committee (Representing Undertrial Prisoners) vs Union of India, the bench observed that undertrials cannot be kept in custody indefinitely. Once it becomes evident that a timely trial is impossible and the accused has already spent a significant period in jail, “courts are ordinarily obligated to enlarge them on bail,” it said.

“Prolonged incarceration without trial infringes the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21,” the judges noted, adding that the unlikelihood of the trial concluding in the near future “necessitates a consequential release”.

The court granted Babu bail on a personal bond of ₹1 lakh, supported by one or more solvent local sureties. He must inform both the NIA and the trial court of his residential details and surrender his passport before release.

The ASG sought a stay on the order to allow the NIA to approach the Supreme Court. The bench refused, reiterating that Babu had already spent more than five years and seven months behind bars without trial.