free them all

Live Law / by Amisha Shrivastava

Senior Advocate Anand Grover on Wednesday told the Supreme Court that the case against Dalit rights activist and advocate Surendra Gadling in the 2016 Gadchiroli Surajgad arson incident was “completely false” and based only on electronic evidence illegally seized in the Bhima Koregaon case.
…
The Court adjourned the matter to next Wednesday (September 24) after briefly hearing Grover and Additional Solicitor General SV Raju.
Read more

thread by Live Law /  @LiveLawIndia (Sep 17):

#SupremeCourt hears bail plea of lawyer Surendra Gadling, accused under UAPA in the 2016 Gadchiroli arson case.
Bench: Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi.

Senior Advocate Anand Grover: he was not named in the FIR. He was arrested in the Bhima Koregaon case. In that case, under procedure unknown to law say that they have found electronic evidence implicating him in this case.

J Maheshwari: What is the material against him?

Grover: Nothing except the evidence found in the other case. The procedure in that case to collect evidence totally contrary to law. And then they say that there is evidence in those electronic devices that you are a member of the maoist party.

Grover: evidence that they have collected, he was espousing that cause to fight it legally. There was no search warrant.

J Maheshwari to ASG SV Raju: he is saying that search Warren application was submitted but it was not permitted by the court still you made a search.

Raju: there is no requirement for obtaining search warrant in the course of investigation. It is right of the investigating officer to search any place for the purpose of finding evidence, those are inherent powers of the IO.

Raju: I will point out from the CrPC. Even assuming that the search was illegal the court has taken a view that material recovered can be admissible as evidence. Even if search is illegal material collected is not washed of. It can be relied upon and conviction can be based on it

J Maheshwari: If we continue for 15 minutes you will finish it?

Raju: It will take time.

Court: List on next Wednesday.

Also read:
▪ 6 yrs, no charges framed – Surendra Gadling stuck in trial limbo in 2016 Surajgarh arson case (The Print / Sep 2025)
▪ SC to hear bail plea of Bhima Koregaon accused Surendra Gadling on Sep 17 (Hindustan Times / Sep 2025)
▪ In Surendra Gadling’s case, adjournment becomes the verdict (Frontline / Aug 2025)
▪ How Long is Too Long? – On the Maximum Period that an Undertrial Prisoner can be Detained (Constitutional Law and Philosophy | by Hany Babu and Surendra Gadling | Oct 2024)
▪ Surendra Gadling’s Computer Was Attacked, Incriminating Documents Planted: Arsenal Consulting (The Wire / July 2021)

Supreme Court Judge Justice MM Sundresh Recuses Himself From Hearing Bail Plea Of Advocate Surendra Gadling In Elgar Parishad Case

27/08/2025

Free Press Journal / by FPJ News Service

The plea was scheduled to be heard by a bench comprising Justice Sundresh and Justice N Kotiswar Singh. Earlier, on August 8, senior advocate Anand Grover had mentioned the case before Chief Justice BR Gavai, seeking an early hearing on grounds that Gadling has been in jail for over six-and-a-half years.
Supreme Court judge Justice MM Sundresh on Tuesday recused himself from hearing the bail plea of advocate Surendra Gadling, an accused in the Elgar Parishad–Maoist links case.
Read more

Justice MM Sundresh Recuses From Hearing Surendra Gadling’s Bail Plea In 2016 Gadchiroli Arson Case

26/08/2025

Live Law / by Amisha Shrivastava

The matter will be heard by another bench.
Justice MM Sundresh of the Supreme Court recused himself from hearing the bail plea of Dalit rights activist and advocate Surendra Gadling in the 2016 Gadchiroli arson case. The matter was listed today before a bench of Justice Sundresh and Justice N Kotiswar Singh.
Read more

Supreme Court Justice MM Sundresh recuses from Surendra Gadling bail case

26/08/2025

Bar & Bench / by Ummar Jamal

According to the details available on the Supreme Court website, the matter is not to be listed before Justice Sundresh.
Supreme Court Justice MM Sundresh on Tuesday recused from hearing the bail plea filed by lawyer and activist Surendra Gadling in connection with the 2016 Surajgarh arson case [Surendra Pundalik Gadling vs State of Maharashtra].
According to the details available on the Supreme Court website, the matter is not to be listed before Justice Sundresh.
Read more

Justice M.M. Sundresh recuses from hearing activist Surendra Gadling’s bail plea after repeated adjournments

26/08/2025

The Hindu / by Aaratrika Bhaumik

Activist Surendra Gadling’s counsel had earlier apprised Chief Justice B.R. Gavai that his bail plea had been adjourned 11 times in the Supreme Court
Supreme Court judge Justice M.M. Sundresh on Tuesday (August 26, 2025) recused himself from hearing a bail petition filed by advocate and activist Surendra Gadling in connection with the 2016 Surjagarh iron ore mine arson case.
Read more

Also read:
▪ In Surendra Gadling’s case, adjournment becomes the verdict (Frontline / Aug 2025)
▪ SC to consider listing bail plea of Surendra Gadling (Hindustan Times / Aug 2025)
▪ Will anti-Naxal drive pave way for mining giants? (New Indian Express / May 2025)
▪ How Long is Too Long? – On the Maximum Period that an Undertrial Prisoner can be Detained (Constitutional Law and Philosophy | by Hany Babu and Surendra Gadling | Oct 2024)
▪ When Push Comes to Shove: Tracking Judicial Recusals and Transfers (The Wire / Apr 2023)
▪ DISINHERITING ADIVASIS – THE GADCHIROLI GAME PLAN (KAFILA / June 2018)