‘No relief before chargesheet filed’: Gujarat HC denies bail to Saket Gokhale in crowdfunding ‘misuse’ case

The Gujarat High Court on Monday rejected the bail plea filed by RTI activist-turned-Trinamool Congress spokesperson Saket Gokhale in a case of allegedly misusing the money he received through a crowdsourcing campaign. Denying bail to Gokhale, the High Court asked him to apply afresh after the chargesheet is filed in the case. Gokhale, who has been in custody since December 29, 2022.

Representing Gokhale, senior advocate Asim Pandya informed the court that his client needed up to 14 medications a day. However, the judge dismissed his bail plea.

Also Read: Gujarat: Trinamool Congress spokesperson Saket Gokhale granted bail, arrested again

Also Read

Goa tourist attack: No background check conducted of resort staff, says CM

Indore temple stepwell tragedy: Death toll mounts to 35, search underway for one missing person

Karnataka polls 2023: EC officials check CM’s car enroute to temple

We don’t need crutches to walk ahead, says Kapil Sibal on Digvijaya’s Germany Tweet

Arguing on the merits of the case, Pandya said that Saket Gokhale , a social worker and RTI activist prior to joining Trinamool, had disclosed that the money he was seeking through crowdsourcing was meant for his campaigns as well as to sustain himself.

“When he joined the TMC, he stopped the campaign to show the bona fide,” the advocate said, arguing that there was no misrepresentation of facts on Gokhale’s part. Gokhale has further submitted in court that all his incomes reflect in his bank accounts which are audited and tax paid for.

Also Read: Democracy in shambles: Abhishek Banerjee on Saket Gokhale’s arrest after bail in Gujarat

“He was [sent to] police remand for five days; nothing was recovered…Here’s a case where I’m pointing out this person has been made a scapegoat because of certain reasons that are reflected from the sequence of events…,” Pandya added.

The advocate also cited two Supreme Court judgments which laid down guidelines on arrest and bail – Arnesh Kumar versus the State of Bihar and Satender Kumar Antil versus the CBI – to argue that both these verdicts would apply to his client’s case.

Pandya argued that none of the offences that Gokhale has been charged with are punishable with more than seven years’ imprisonment and that he was ready to deposit Rs 5 lakh or Rs 10 lakh, as the court may deem suitable, as a mark of his bona fide.

However, rejecting Pandya’s submissions, the court said it was not inclined to provide relief to Gokhale till the chargesheet was filed in the case.