A Mumbai Sessions Court on Friday (August 7, 2026) rejected the anticipatory bail applications of two Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) students. Both are accused of raising slogans demanding the release of Delhi anti-Hindu riot accused Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam during a gathering organised on the death anniversary of former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba in October 2025.
Both students are among the 9 people against whom the police had registered a case. The prosecution also alleged that books and other material related to Maoist ideology were recovered from them.
However, the court granted anticipatory bail to seven other students involved in the same case. The court said that paying tribute to Saibaba was not unlawful in itself, but other charges levied against the two students, Abhirup Paul (32) and Kamakhya Das (23), and the material found from them go against granting anticipatory bail.
What is the complete matter? Students had gathered at TISS on Saibaba’s death anniversary
The matter pertains to October 12, 2025, when a group of around 10-12 students gathered at the Deonar campus of TISS between approximately 7:30 PM and 8:30 PM. According to the complaint by the institute’s Associate Dean, the students organized this gathering without permission.
During this time, pictures of GN Saibaba were placed on a tree and his poems were recited. This event was organized on his death anniversary. GN Saibaba was a former professor at Delhi University.
He was convicted in 2017 on charges of having links with a Maoist organization, though the Bombay High Court acquitted him in 2024. The Trombay Police had registered an FIR against 9 people in this case, which was later transferred to the Crime Branch of the Mumbai Police.
According to the allegations, the students also raised slogans demanding the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam from jail during the gathering.
Being students, they are expected to respect the law: What did the court say on slogans and books?
While refusing to grant anticipatory bail to both students, Additional Sessions Judge VB Bohra said that there is no doubt that GN Saibaba was acquitted of the charges framed against him and therefore, paying tribute to him cannot be called unlawful.
But the activities of the students were not limited merely to paying tribute. The court noted that both are accused of raising slogans in support of the release of Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam from jail, whereas both are facing trial under UAPA related to unlawful activities against the nation.
The court also observed that the slogans were not raised during any public movement or procession. The judge stated that being students, the accused are expected to respect the dignity of the law. On this basis, the court rejected the anticipatory bail applications of both.
Court also expressed concern over books and Maoist material
Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hire, appearing on behalf of the prosecution, opposed the students’ anticipatory bail. The prosecution also stated that objectionable material was recovered from the laptops and mobile phones of both students.
Electronic devices contained downloaded materials such as Selected Works of Mao Zedong by Mao Zedong, The Right of Nations to Self-Determination by Vladimir Lenin, Caste and Revolution by N. Ravi, Fractured Freedom by Kobad Ghandy, and publications related to the CPI (Maoist). The prosecution also claimed that certain information was deleted from the devices.
The counsel for the students argued that merely downloading books does not prove a person’s association with Maoist ideology, as these books are not banned and can be purchased openly. To this, the court accepted that merely downloading books published by a Maoist organization is not an offense in itself.
However, the court remarked that these books were found to contain material supporting an ideology that incites or aids the division of India. According to the court, this prima facie creates suspicion that the accused were influenced by Maoist thought or ideology and an attempt might have been made to convey it to other students through the gathering.
The court clarified that looking at the evidence found against the accused, suspicion arises regarding their conduct. Considering these circumstances, the court refused to grant anticipatory bail to both students.
Meanwhile, the court granted bail to seven other students involved in the case. The court found that the main allegation against them was merely attending the Saibaba gathering on October 12, 2025, and no objectionable material was recovered from them.
