The Supreme Court on Wednesday (January 21) said that it would order to expedite proceedings against lawyer-activist Surendra Gadling in the 2016 Surjagarh arson case. Gadling sought bail in the case, and said that he has been behind bars for seven years without a trial since his arrest in 2019.
On December 25, 2016, 76 vehicles transporting iron ore from Surjagarh mines were set ablaze by armed men. The police had said that the act was committed by members of the banned organisation, Communist Party of India (Maoist) and arrested over 15 persons.
Meanwhile, the Pune police arrested Surendra Gadling on June 6, 2018, in connection with the Elgaar Parishad case. Gadling was arrested along with activists, lawyers, writers, from across the country, who the police claimed were members of CPI (Maoist) and were doing activities furthering the cause of the organisation. The police then seized the electronic devices belonging to the accused.
Over six months later, in January 2019, the police claimed that their probe in the Elgaar Parishad case and the perusal of the electronic evidence had led them to suspect the role of Gadling in the arson case. The Maharashtra police also alleged that his co-accused in the Elgaar case, Telugu poet Varavara Rao, was involved in the case. The police filed a chargesheet against them and others, claiming that they were part of the conspiracy to plan the torching of the vehicles in a bid to stop the mining activity in Surjagarh.
While the two remained in custody in the Elgaar Parishad and the arson case, Rao was granted medical bail in both cases in 2021.
What has been happening in the trial court since?
In 2020, the Elgaar case was transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). Since the case was then to be tried before a special NIA court, the records and proceedings held until then before a court in Pune, were transferred to Mumbai. These included the electronic evidence seized by the Pune police in 2018.
Story continues below this ad
Meanwhile, in the Gadchiroli court, a chargesheet was filed against Gadling and others in 2019.
In 2022, the prosecution made a written submission before the Gadchiroli sessions court that it could not proceed with the trial, given that the original records and proceedings that formed the basis of their case were then before the special NIA court in Mumbai. The transfer of this evidence to Gadchiroli was deemed not possible at the time.
Following this, Gadling filed for bail before the sessions court and then the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, which was rejected. He also filed a discharge application in 2022, citing that there is no evidence to show any link with the arson incident. He also questioned the belated prosecution in the case, stating that he was falsely implicated as an afterthought to keep him behind bars in both cases.
In 2023, a new sessions court was set up in Aheri, Gadchiroli, and the case was transferred there. The discharge plea is yet to be heard. Gadling, who is lodged in Taloja jail, near Mumbai, initially sought to argue the discharge plea himself. He had submitted that since he legally represents himself in both the Elgaar case and the arson case, he should be physically produced in Aheri so that he can argue the discharge plea. The police had opposed the plea for physical production, citing ‘security reasons’.
Story continues below this ad
In October 2025, the sessions court in Aheri said that Gadling should be produced physically before it. The court said that denying permission to him to argue his discharge application in person, pending for nearly three years, would “compound the injustice already caused by the inordinate delay”. Gadling was then produced before the court.
While arguing the discharge plea, Gadling submitted that the framing of charges cannot take place without the original documents. The court considered this and said it is necessary to fix a definite time frame within which the prosecution must take necessary steps to secure the original records.
On November 3, 2025, the court directed that the original record be brought before it. So far, this step remains to be completed.
On December 31, 2025, the Aheri judge hearing the matter was transferred, following which a new appointment is yet to be made, stalling the case.
What has happened before the Supreme Court so far?
Story continues below this ad
In 2023, Gadling approached the Supreme Court seeking bail in the case. On September 24, 2025, Justice J K Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi heard the case. On hearing that the trial had yet to begin, the court asked the state how long a person can be left in custody as an undertrial without the trial commencing. The state blamed the accused for the delay, saying he was refusing to argue the discharge plea on video-conference. Gadling, represented by senior advocate Anand Grover, told the court that there was no impediment to produce him physically to be able to argue the case himself, and that there was no issue of security as raised, since he had been out on interim bail more than twice, and no violations or any issues were reported.
The SC had then sought to know the reasons for the delay, the status of the proceedings on Gadling’s discharge plea, and the time it would take the prosecution to proceed with the trial and conclude it.
On December 1, 2025, during the next hearing, Gadling’s lawyers also submitted that there were many issues with the VC system. The lawyers also told the court that there was no special public prosecutor or permanent prosecutor appointed in the case.
It was also submitted that there was no evidence to charge him in the arson case and that he was being ‘branded’ for representing many accused of Naxal activities in courts in Gadchiroli. The Supreme Court was also informed that the prosecution had itself said that the case cannot be proceeded with until the original papers are sent from Mumbai, but that after Gadling approached the SC, this submission was withdrawn.
Story continues below this ad
On Wednesday, the court was again informed that now there is no judge in the Aheri court to preside over the case. It was submitted that for seven years, his liberty was curtailed, even as other co-accused were granted bail, and that long incarceration without trial, should be considered as a ground for his release. The state said that inspection of the original documents for Gadling can be arranged within a week’s time. Grover told court that the evidence is voluminous and a week would be a short time for it. The SC said that it would consider expediting the trial, while also giving suggestions on improvement of VC facilities and ascertaining on whether any judge is posted in the concerned court.
The matter has been kept after a month for hearing in the SC.
