When will policemen who ‘framed’ Prof Saibaba be punished?

Imprisoned for the last 10 years of his life, Prof. G.N. Saibaba was 90 per cent disabled and confined to a wheelchair when he was arrested. Nonetheless, Maharashtra Police accused him of being a dreaded Naxalite leader, an ‘urban Naxal’ — the term used by the BJP and PM Narendra Modi for leftist intellectuals among others — and hatching dreadful conspiracies. It did not matter that his students had a different image of him. He was diligent, regular in engaging classes, helpful to students and passionate about teaching.

In one of his first interviews after he walked out a free man seven months ago, Saibaba spoke of his desire to go back to teaching. That would certainly help him get better, he had said.

In a heartfelt tribute following his death, poet and novelist Meena Kandasamy recalled her meeting with Saibaba in April this year. “When I met you earlier this year in April, it felt like I was meeting a friend from forever. We discussed literature, the postcolonial novel, and what it means to be Bahujan within Indian academia. You laughed at how little I ate. You wore your suffering incredibly lightly — so casually that we felt doubly enraged at what the Indian state had inflicted upon you. Never did I realise that this was going to be my last ever meeting with you.”

Advocate Anand Grover (arguing for Prof Shoma Sen's bail petition) had exclaimed in court, "...Saibaba was acquitted after ten years…Who is accountable? Whose conscience is suffering because of this?"

The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court, while acquitting Saibaba of all charges, listed how flimsy the charge sheet was and how the police resorted to using an unlettered person as a witness for seizures when it could have engaged any academic from the campus. There were procedural lapses and the conviction by an opinionated trial judge made it worse. 

The judgment convicting Saibaba observed that life imprisonment was not 'a sufficient punishment', but the court's 'hands were tied' because that was the maximum punishment provided under the law. While acquitting him of the charges, the high court expressed disapproval of this remark and said it was 'unwarranted and lacked dispassionate objectivity'. The trial court judge also recorded that he was punishing Saibaba, among others, for all the Naxalite violence in Gadchiroli district since 1980, when the district came into being. Saibaba was in school at the time.

Advocate Mihir Desai, speaking at a workshop hosted by LiveLaw, had pointed out how in case after case, the courts have acquitted several accused and observed that the investigation was shoddy and had been botched up. Why is it, then, that not a single policeman has been pulled up and punished for botched investigation and prosecution, he wondered.

There has been a outpouring of grief in academic circles, among human rights activists and left liberals. Pointing an accusing finger at what they described as ‘institutional murder’, they have said in one voice that the ‘system’ killed Saibaba by implicating him in a false case, by fabricating evidence and by denying him medical assistance, bail and parole when he needed them.

He lost his mother in 2020, but was denied parole to see her before her death, to attend her funeral after her death, or to attend post-funeral rites. When Dera Sachha Sauda chief Ram Rahim, convicted of rape, is released multiple times before elections by the state, what explains the denial of parole to Saibaba, they are asking.

After his release, Saibaba broke down while talking about his late mother. She had raised him, a disabled child, and would carry him to school. That was her only dream — that her disabled son should get a proper education, he recalled. “If I was teaching in Delhi University, it was only because of her,” he said. In her final days, her only wish was to see him but the State and the ‘system’ denied him that last meeting.

He had no regrets about his activism, which he engaged in after fulfilling his duty to the university, he said. “Those giving voice to the voiceless should be welcomed, not punished. It's in the State's advantage to address these issues… look into history. Any society which has progressed has done so because of the activism of the educated and those who have an advantage, which enables them to raise issues of people who are not heard. Doing so doesn't go against the Constitution,” he told Jyoti Punwani of Rediff.com in an interview after his release.

His death has also revived the discussion on the role of the police and the judiciary who are failing to uphold civil liberties and the guarantees laid down to citizens in the Constitution.

In an eloquent explanation, Saibaba had said, “Humanity once needed the State to organise them and enforce order. Over time, however, the State has become so powerful that it is now oppressing humanity.” It is time for society and the State to deliberate on how to make the system more accountable to the needs of the people and to deliver justice.