3 min readMumbaiJul 11, 2026 07:12 AM IST
First published on: Jul 10, 2026 at 09:48 PM IST
In the Elgaar Parishad case, lawyer activist Sudha Bharadwaj told a special court on Friday that mere communication between co-accused cannot be a ground to cancel bail. The court was hearing arguments on the National Investigation Agency’s plea seeking cancellation of bail to Bharadwaj and three other accused, over a meeting at the Mumbai Press Club in January. The agency claims that they have violated a bail condition, by communicating with each other.
Bharadwaj’s lawyer Yug Chaudhry, told court she and others had attended a small gathering on January 19 at the Press Club, invited by journalists, and had only discussed prison conditions and the difficulties faced while on bail, denying the NIA charge that the gathering was done with an intention to propagate the ideology of the CPI (Maoist) and to discuss further course of action for spreading the ‘Urban Naxal’ movement.
Chaudhry told court that the NIA did not have a single material to prove this allegation and that statements recorded by the agency of journalists who were at the meeting show that the discussion was journalistic or academic.
“Communication between co-accused per se can hardly be a ground to cancel bail. I have interacted with my co-accused on multiple prior occasions when we meet on court dates, including for purposes of providing photocopies of replies, conveying orders. In fact, in this application for cancellation, NIA had supplied the documents relied by then to my co-accused Vernon Gonsalves, and he was told to supply a copy to me,” the lawyer told court on Bharadwaj’s behalf.
He said that Bharadwaj was granted bail in December 2021 by the Bombay High Court, after she spent three years and three months in jail, and that during this period she had reported to the police station 121 times. He also said that there have been 380 court dates since the chargesheet was filed but the charges are yet to be framed, and the extraordinary step of cancellation of bail in such circumstances would mean punishment without trial.
“There was no discussion about the case. There were no speeches or a common discussion. There is not a whisper in the statements to prove the allegation that anything to propagate and further Naxal activity was discussed. Even if they say we discussed prison conditions, how can that be a ground to cancel bail. I have written a book on the topic, so have others,” Chaudhry said.
Special public prosecutor Prakash Shetty said that the bail conditions disallow the accused from communicating with each other and therefore the material including CCTV footage shows that they had met and spoken, violating the condition.
Telugu poet Varavara Rao’s lawyer, R Satyanarayan, told court that the accused were invited by a third party and were not aware of each other’s attendance. He also said that there were no violations in any bail conditions or reliefs granted by the court from time to time, nor has the NIA alleged that they had done anything to interfere with the trial, or tamper with evidence.
The court will hear arguments by the lawyers of the other two accused, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira, whose bails are sought to be cancelled by the NIA on July 20.
The court also imposed a combined fine of Rs 90,000 on the Verma couple. 
Share
