Hyderabad: Telangana high court recently granted bail to Amitabh Bagchi, a politburo member of the banned CPI (Maoist), bringing to an end 16 years of incarceration.Arrested by Karimnagar police in 2010 in connection with a 2008 case, Bagchi walked out of Cherlapally Central Prison on Feb 27. Justice Juvvadi Sridevi, while granting bail, observed that a court (sessions court here) becomes functus officio (no further legal authority) once it disposes of a bail application, strictly barring it from reviewing or altering its own decision under section 362 of the CrPC. Setting aside the sessions judge’s order, Justice Sridevi held that bail cannot be cancelled by the same court unless ‘supervening circumstances’ arise, such as a violation of conditions or misuse of liberty. The high court characterised the lower court’s reversal of bail as ‘mechanical’, noting that the primary grounds—the gravity of the offence and the accused’s history—were already known when bail was originally granted. Recently surrendered senior Maoist leader Malla Raji Reddy alias Sangram was named A1 in the case, while Bagchi was arrayed as A28 alongside several other central committee and politburo members, including former Maoist supremo Muppala Lakshman Rao alias Ganapathi, and slain leader Kishenji. The case is currently pending trial before a sessions court in Karimnagar. The judge clarified that if the prosecution is aggrieved by a bail order, the correct legal course is to approach a superior court rather than seek a review before the same judge on identical facts. Emphasising that the seriousness of allegations alone cannot justify revoking liberty, the high court termed the cancellation an “illegality and material irregularity”. Although a sessions court granted Bagchi default bail in 2010, he remained in custody for years as he could not furnish sureties. After the charge sheet was filed, Bagchi sought regular bail and was granted relief by the sessions court in 2024. However, before he could furnish sureties, police challenged the order and the bail was cancelled. He then moved the high court challenging this cancellation. His counsel, B Nalin Kumar, argued that the sessions judge erroneously cancelled bail without any new circumstances or violations, particularly as the petitioner was in judicial custody at the time. State’s contentionThe state counsel contended that the accused operated on a pan-India scale and, if released, was likely to rejoin the Maoist organisation and evade trial. The state further argued that, as a senior member, he posed a threat to witnesses and was likely to tamper with evidence. Urging dismissal of the plea, the state informed the bench that Bagchi had already been sentenced to life imprisonment and an additional eight years in two separate cases investigated by the NIA and Chhattisgarh police.
