Cuttack, Oct. 19: Orissa High Court today quashed the case registered and taken cognisance of by a fast track court against Subhashree Panda alias Mili Panda, the wife of Orissa based Maoist leader Sabyasachi Panda.
Police had registered the case against her under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act for alleged involvement in terror activities. The fast track court of adhoc additional district sessions judge, Khurda, had taken cognisance of it observing that “there are sufficient materials to frame charge against the accused”.
“The high court order paves the way for her release from custody,” Subhashree’s counsel Manoj Mishra told The Telegraph. Subhashree is lodged at Jharpada jail in Bhubaneswar.
The police alleged that she had been coordinating Maoist activities in the state and outside.
Additional director general of police (CID-crime branch) Abhay said the government would explore the options (judicial recourse) “after going through the full text of the verdict”. The CID-crime branch had been investigating into the case.
Subhashree, who is in her late 30s, had filed a petition challenging the validity of criminal proceedings against her.
While disposing of the petition today, Justice Indrajeet Mohanty endorsed the contention of her counsel that “the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act had not been followed while registering the case”.
According to the act, before registering a case of such nature a separate independent authority should assess the evidence collected and recommend it to the government.
Subhashree, suspected to have been coordinating Maoist activities not only in the state, but also in neighbouring states, was arrested from a rented house on the outskirts of Bhubaneswar before midnight on January 14, 2010.
Material evidence in form of jungle shoes, diary, unaccounted cash to the tune of lakhs, mobile phones, vehicles, laptop, CDs, DVDs, walkie-talkies and huge quantity of naxal-related literature against the police and state government were allegedly seized from her possession during the arrest.
Cases were registered accusing her of being a member of terrorist organisation indulging in conspiracy, terrorist activities and amassing of funds for terror activities. Moreover, it was accused that she had been enrolled as a permanent member of the party (CPI-Maoist) and was in-charge of its publicity division. The case was later passed on for investigation by the CID-crime branch.
After taking cognisance of the case, the trial court, on January 5, 2011, framed charges against Subhashree under several sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The sessions trial was scheduled to start on January 21, 2011.
Acting on Subhashree’s petition, the high court had issued an interim stay order on the trial proceedings on January 20, 2011, while calling for the records and later reserved judgment on March 9.
Some other lapses during and after her arrest were also pointed out. “The high court, however, did not pass any observation on them, saying it was not necessary after quashing the cognisance taken by the fast track court,” Subhashree’s counsel said.
It was alleged that provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and Supreme Court guidelines were violated from the time of her arrest. She was arrested after sunset in the absence of a magistrate and her nine-year-old daughter was left behind helpless. She was also not allowed to contact her relatives and lawyer. Subhashree was remanded in police custody beyond the stipulated 15 days. This was done by the court of the judicial magistrate (first class), Banapur, without vetting the case diary, it was alleged.
