Akhil Gogoi claims efforts have made to give anti-CAA protests maoist slant

Guwahati: Sivasagar MLA in Assam and Raijor Dal chief Akhil Gogoi claimed on Saturday that attempts are being made to portray his anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act protests as Maoist demonstrations in order to bring charges against him.

Akhil Gogoi was required to appear before the National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Guwahati in order to hear the case against him for the anti-CAA protests.

The NIA court has started hearing the case as of today. He must return to the NIA court on June 30 for a hearing on the two charges brought against him, according to the information we have.

Meanwhile, speaking after the hour-long hearing today, Akhil Gogoi said, “They are trying to frame the anti-CAA protests as a Maoist protest and pin it against me.”

It should be stated that on March 3 the Supreme Court extended the protection from arrest of Assam MLA Akhil Gogoi till March 13 in connection with a case involving anti-CAA protests and possible Maoist ties.

Akhil Gogoi, a Sivasagar MLA who spoke out against the federal government during the anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act demonstrations in Assam, filed a petition with the Supreme Court on February 19 challenging the Gauhati High Court’s decision to allow the special NIA court in Assam to move forward with the filing of charges against him in one of the two cases.

Justices V Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal’s panel postponed the case for another hearing on March 13 due to the petitioner’s attorney’s unavailability.

The bench observed, “Interim protection to continue till next date.”

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) had earlier informed the SC that Akhil Gogoi could not be given bail since he is a suspected leader of Maoist activity in Assam even though Akhil Gogoi claimed that the cases against him were the consequence of “political vendetta.”

In February, the bench had noted, “Let notice be served on the standing counsel for the State (NIA), for the limited purpose of considering the grant of protection to the petitioner from arrest pursuant to the impugned order, returnable on February 24, 2023. In the meantime, the petitioner (Akhil Gogoi) shall be protected against arrest in connection with FIR bearing … dated December 14, 2019, Police Station NIA, Guwahati.”

The high court had granted the NIA permission to ask that charges be filed in the special court against Akhil Gogoi and three of his accomplices, Dhajya Konwar, Manas Konwar, and Bitu Sonowal in relation to anti-CAA protests and suspected Maoist ties. The decision was made as a result of the NIA’s appeal of a special NIA court’s decision to clear the four.

After reviving the case, the high court panel made up of justices Suman Shyam and Malasri Nandi instructed the prosecution to proceed with filing charges against Akhil Gogoi and the others.

Akhil Gogoi’s counsel Santanu Borthakur had said, “The high court has accepted NIA’s plea to reopen the case and frame charges against the four persons. The case will be heard again in the Special NIA Court.”

The other three defendants, who had received bail in the NIA case, were released from custody in the interim. when serving 567 days in prison, Akhil Gogoi was finally freed when the court refused his bail and a special NIA judge absolved him and the other three of all charges.

Akhil Gogoi was among the four who had been ordered to appear today before the special NIA court. Two instances involving Akhil Gogoi and anti-CAA demonstrations are being investigated by the NIA. In one of those cases, the special NIA court had granted him bail; the Gauhati High Court had also upheld it in April 2021.

He remained to be held in judicial custody although the NIA was looking at Akhil Gogoi’s request for bail in the second case involving violence at anti-CAA protests. Akhil Gogoi and his three friends were freed on July 1st, 2021, by the special NIA court for their alleged involvement in the violent anti-CAA protests in Assam in December 2019.

The court found that Akhil Gogoi’s “talk of blockade” was neither “a terrorist act” nor a threat to the nation’s economic security. The NIA court then filed an appeal with the Gauhati High Court to enable the agency to file charges against Akhil Gogoi under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other sections.

The special NIA court had mentioned in a strongly worded order that in the interest of justice, it found the conduct and approach of the investigating authority in the case to be “discouraging” at the least.

The order read, “The court has high expectations from a premier investigating agency like the NIA, entrusted with the profoundly important task of protecting our country and us, citizens from the menace of terrorism. The court hopes and expects that such high standards will be upheld, for the sake of the country and this one will be just an exception.”