Supreme Court to Hear Mahesh Raut’s Bail Plea in Elgar Parishad Case on September 15

Fast Summary

• Supreme Court Hearing: The Supreme Court of India will hear the bail plea of Mahesh Raut, an accused in the Elgar parishad-Bhima Koregaon case, on September 15, 2025.He seeks release due to deteriorating health.
• medical Concerns: Raut’s counsel argued that he suffers from rheumatoid arthritis and requires specialized treatment unavailable in prison or JJ Hospital, Mumbai.
• Court Observations: The Bench led by Justices M.M. Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma remarked that serious medical conditions warrant consideration for bail. They allowed authorities to file affidavits on the matter.
• Past Custody and Case Details:

– Raut has spent nearly seven years in judicial custody since his arrest by Pune police in June 2018 related to Bhima-Koregaon violence.
– Violence followed alleged provocative speeches at the Elgar Parishad conclave held in December 2017 at Shaniwarwada, Pune.

• Current Status: Bail granted to Raut by Bombay High Court was stayed on appeal filed by NIA; he remains imprisoned at Taloja jail under charges of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act due to alleged links with CPI(Maoist).

Indian Opinion Analysis

mahesh Raut’s petition reflects broader implications for both legal procedures centered around prolonged judicial custody and humanitarian considerations within India’s justice system. His request for bail based on a chronic medical condition spotlights challenges faced by prisoners requiring specialized healthcare unavailable within correctional facilities.

The Supreme Court’s remarks about government doctors “playing it safe” suggest awareness of institutional hesitations tied to liability concerns-a notable commentary on public health infrastructure within jails. Additionally, with reference to his nearly seven-year detention without trial completion, this case also reignites debates over balancing national security laws with protection against indefinite incarceration.

The upcoming hearing may offer critical insights into how courts navigate cases involving health rights amidst stringent terrorism-related charges under UAPA laws while upholding principles of justice that could influence precedent-setting outcomes across similar petitions.

Read more: Link