In granting bail to Binayak Sen, the doctor who was convicted earlier this year by a trial court in Chhattisgarh, the Supreme Court has sent a clear message to the lower judiciary and law enforcement agencies throughout the country: the charge of sedition should not be bandied about lightly. Although the court passed only a one-line order, the observations made by Justices H.S. Bedi and C.K. Prasad during oral arguments on Friday add up to a scathing indictment of the weak case the Chhattisgarh government put up against the paediatrician and human rights activist. Their remarks also suggest the trial court did not apply its mind to the case. Justices Bedi and Prasad demolished two key parts of the prosecution's case during the bail hearing. First, they said the mere possession of Maoist literature did not make a person a Maoist. Secondly, and more crucially, they noted that since jailors supervised every meeting Dr. Sen had with Narayan Sanyal — the jailed Maoist leader whose messages he allegedly helped smuggle out — “the question of passing letters or documents does not arise.” If Chhattisgarh had a professional police force and well-functioning judiciary, these glaring weaknesses in the case against Dr. Sen would have been spotted at the very beginning of the legal process and the charges thrown out. Sadly, it has required the highest court in the country to lay this bare before the world.
In legal terms, Dr. Sen's appeal against his conviction will now continue at the Bilaspur High Court but the endgame, should that forum uphold the charge of sedition, is clear: going by its own observations, the Supreme Court is likely to acquit him eventually. Unfortunately, the Binayak Sen case is not the only Chhattisgarh-related matter involving blatant injustice to come to New Delhi. For the past two years, the Supreme Court has been considering a public interest litigation petition on the role of officially sponsored anti-Maoist vigilantes who have been responsible for the death and displacement of adivasis on a large scale. Though the Chhattisgarh government has repeatedly assured the court that the vigilante squads have been disbanded, it has dragged its feet on the registration of criminal cases and the provision of compensation for the victims of violence. Moreover, as the well-documented attack on innocent tribals in Tarmetla and other villages by the security forces last month demonstrates, vigilantism continues to exact a terrible human toll in the State. With the Raman Singh government refusing to accept responsibility for the appalling state of affairs in Dantewada, the one hope the adivasis of the region have for justice is with the Supreme Court.
Comments:
Feudalism is still running strong in India even while she is poised to assume a major leadership role among nations. Chhattisgarh, Salwa Judum, etc. wouldn't simply disappear unless they are openly challenged by the citizenry for whom human rights must uphold in every possible dimension we all participate as humanity. It is agonizing to see SC getting involved in too many trivial cases which could have been settled at lower courts easily under normal circumstances, but our judiciary appears to be too weak at the lower echelon.
Thanks for the great editorial.
We bow our head in respectful admiration of wisdom of Supreme Court on its judgment on Binayak Sen's. This will go a long way to correct the image of India as banana republic at the beck and call of mighty and corrupted elites. It is not Dr. Sen who should be tried but the anti nationals who are masquerading as de facto rulers who are pillaging the nation. Private monopolies in water and electricity distribution, airport development and so on have been allowed to be created, where huge profits could be made by corrupting the regulator and allowing private monopolies to charge predatory prices. Tens of thousands of hectares have been given away to corporations for commercialisation in the guise of development, construction of highways, creation of Special Economic Zones and so on, at prices that are less than 10 per cent of the value of those tracts of land, resulting in forced of lakhs of the poorest people, abandoning them to starvation. No wonder that many of them to join the Maoists. The fly by night unscrupulous beneficiaries have been stripping the land of natural resources much for exports at the cost of the environment. Such deals have resulted in the creation of monster corporations that are so powerful and influential that they have come to virtually control all institutions of power as we see from the Radia tapes. A classic case of tail wagging the dog! 
The BJP government in Chattisgarh can take a lead in solving this menacing problem if they rise to the occasion and think out of the box. Am I hopeful? No. Politician tribes do not produce many statesmen.
Let us hope Raman is on the right side of the history.
Doctor Binayak Sen bail is pleasant becase no man is naxalite who kept their books. Chhattisgarh government's action is wrong.
The Hindu's editorial does not surprise me as the newspaper has already acquitted Dr Binayak Sen. Even if one accepts the argument that the Chhattisgarh government deliberately implicated Dr Sen, no citizen of India who believes in the rule of law has any moral or legal right to pronounce personal judgements before the entire legal process is completed. Publications like The Hindu, civil liberty groups, and Nobel laureates have declared Dr Sen not guilty in their own wisdom. This is no different from the kind of vigilante justice you have consistently accused the Chhattisgarh government of. His bail proves that Dr Sen has a fair chance to seek justice from the highest court of the land. But the parallel justice system being run by The Hindu and the likes is a direct challenge to the constituionally established system.
It is wonderful to note that Dr. Binayak Sen was granted bail by India's Supreme Court. Jai Hind! Now that that's done, the judgment inflicted on him by the Chhattisgarh sessions court last Christmas Eve should be speedily vacated through the appeals process. The Raman Singh government in Chhattisgarh must quit harassing Dr. Sen and his lovely family. Yet until Mr. Singh and the Chhattisgarh regime are brought to account for their putrid actions, justice will not have been served.
Dr Binayak Sen is a “respectable Dr Sen” of Bengal. However Bengal does not have any shortage of “respectable Dr Sen”. If Binayak Sen is a victim of state terrorism, Dr Gopal Sen of Jadavpur University was victim of non-state terrorism.
Dr.Raman Singh should immediately put up his papers without any further delay
I think, Chhatisgarh has become a mockery of governance. Previously, it armed its innocent people in Taliban style to fight against Maoists insurgents. If, the government has been unable to employ Andhra mechanism to weed out maoists, why not it seeks help from centre and strengthen its system rather than arming the normal people in what may otherwise fire back upon the government itself in the time to come, if they feel to do so.Secondly, in Vinayak Sen's conviction case the government leveled charge of sedition against a person whose only offense was to meet a maoist inside jail, that also under the jailor's supervision, as a social activist. Sen's work in this part of India's has been of commended. What he deserved was public acceptance of the great service he offered towards humanity against the popular whim. The government on the other side has been operating on the whim as if whatever they think is right and they have their own rules and regulations. Don't forget that a government at best is an enforcing agency of the rule of the land and it has to protect the natural justice, as well. Please bring proffessionalism, discard inefficient and useless people from the system for the betterment of the society and the nation at large.
The verdict is a clear cut indictment of the State govt and its police. But the issue throws a larger question before the public. The so called civil rights activists, should learn to draw a clear line between exposing the civil rights violations, highlighting the injustics to the tribals and teeming up with maoists groups , in a covert way. The Supreme court had come to his rescue only on the larger question of defining sedition. But carrying maoist literature, meeting the group either clandestinely or openly, does not in anyway make them less offensive. Mr Sen is fortunate that the dreaded TADA had been annulled years back . Otherwise, he would be languising in jail, with no support. Vaiko met a similar fate. Atleast in his case, he has been openly sympathising with LTTE cadres and the affected Srilankan tamils. If carrying literature does not make a person criminal, then showing sympathy and support for the tamil cause is not an offense at all and atleast thatis what Vaiko and co would argue.The Supreme court will do a greater service to the nation, by underlining the principles on what constitute crime/sedition, by including similar examples, in this case.
Excellant editorial by The Hindu. Everyone knows that Dr. Sen is innocent. I salute Supreme Court for providing the bail for Dr. Sen.
In circumstances where the law is patently an 'ass', it is right and proper for the media to take up causes such as that of Dr Binayak Sen. If newspapers like the Hindu do not take up such miscarriges of justice, then those who have been incarcerated for mainly political reasons will be at the mercy of the vagaries of vengeful legal systems. While we recognise the fact that the media are often partisan, so too is the judiciary. In this context, the Supreme Court's role as a corrective to abuses of power cannot be overstated.
The timing could not be any better. I am however disappointed when 'The Hindu' did not come up with such Editorials and critical analysis regarding the arrest of Tamil political activist Seeman and his acquittal by the Judges of the High Court. I respect the role of 'The Hindu' in disseminating knowledge and awareness throughout the India. When people like Dr. Binayak Sen can get great support from The Hindu, why can't people like Seeman were never highlighted? Here is a Man who has dedicated his life for the upliftment of Tamils in Tamilnadu and in Sri Lanka, and asked nothing in return. And yet, the fourth pillar of democracy is not yet convinced of his pursuits.
Why is it that in our country those who work for the people are punished and those really do the crime are saved? Why do our nation elect leaders of these sort who are not bothered about all these?
Apex court's judgement is a wise one, no doubt. But what makes me skeptic of our judiciary is its incapability of freeing Dr.Sen once for all, instead of this personal bond and securities and the need to be present for questioning as and when required and etc. Supreme Court should have asked the other lesser courts (the like of Bilaspur High Court) to dismiss all petitions against this man. I am sure that our highest court is not ignorant or unaware of the international credibility of Dr.Binayak Sen. The whole world knows what he is doing and how much worth he is. What then stops our supreme judges to set him free? Even the President, PM and the higher-ups could have intervened in the case long before. But they never did. Not surprising anyway. Being for just what they are; the one content with her Sukhoy flyings and frequent foreign trips and the latter with his characteristic role in all the shady and corrupt deals.
While I am overjoyed by Dr. Binayak Sen's release and particularly the observations made by the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court, I am pained by observations by some of your readers above in equating sympathy for downtrodden and oppressed people as somehow being seditious.
In 1967, in Naxalbari, a false movement started. Some people promised to the tea garden workers of that area, that if you can kill local landlords, then their land will be distributed to you. So it was a movement to convert labors into farmers. It was a wrong and irrational demand. Increasing pressure on land and increasing number of farmers cannot be a progressive demand. It is not practical also. When Naxal leaders fought election in 1977, they lost their deposit in Naxalbari. This is totally different scene from the vote of Telengana area after Telengana movement of ‘46-47’ period. NAXALBARI MOVEMENT IS A FALSE MOVEMENT FROM THE BEGGINNING.