Supreme Court: Surendra Gadling Bail Plea in Gadchiroli Set for Oct 14

• The Supreme Court has scheduled Surendra Gadling's bail plea in the 2016 Gadchiroli arson case for a final hearing on October 14.
• Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that Gadling has been in custody for over seven years, while other alleged co-accused in the same incident have secured bail.
• Gadling, also an accused in the Bhima Koregaon case, has already been granted bail in that matter.
• The Gadchiroli case involves allegations of a Maoist conspiracy and the burning of over 80 vehicles, with charges under the UAPA and IPC.
• The Supreme Court will hear the appeal challenging a Bombay High Court order denying him bail on October 14, 2026, following a history of judicial recusals.

Sibal highlighted a critical disparity, arguing that other individuals allegedly involved in the same incident have already secured bail.

The Supreme Court has set October 14 for the final hearing of Surendra Gadling's bail plea in connection with the 2016 Gadchiroli arson case. This decision came after the court granted an application for an early hearing of the matter. A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and Augustine George Masih will preside over the proceedings.

During the recent hearing, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Gadling, emphasized his client's prolonged incarceration, noting that Gadling has been in custody for approximately seven years and seven months in relation to this case. Sibal highlighted a critical disparity, arguing that other individuals allegedly involved in the same incident have already secured bail. He specifically pointed out that while the alleged perpetrators who burned a truck, described as wearing purple clothes, are now out on bail, Gadling remains implicated and detained.

Sibal also informed the bench that Gadling is an accused in the high-profile Bhima Koregaon case, where he has already been granted bail. This fact was presented to underscore the differential treatment Gadling is experiencing across different cases. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the State, initially suggested scheduling the matter on a non-miscellaneous day, citing its status as a leave granted case. However, following discussions, the Court allowed the application for an expedited hearing, leading to the October 14 listing.

Surendra Gadling's bail application stems from the 2016 Surajgarh arson case, which is currently under investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The prosecution's allegations against Gadling are severe: he is accused of being part of a broader Maoist conspiracy and of directing co-accused individuals to set fire to more than 80 vehicles. These vehicles were reportedly transporting iron ore from the Surjagarh mines located in Etapalli tehsil of Maharashtra’s Gadchiroli district. Consequently, Gadling faces charges under various provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code.

Gadling has been in custody since June 2018, a period that now spans over seven years. His current appeal before the Supreme Court challenges a Bombay High Court order that previously denied him bail in this specific Gadchiroli arson case. The Bhima Koregaon case, in which Gadling is also an accused and has secured bail, is similarly being investigated by the NIA under the UAPA, with allegations of Maoist links. The legal arguments surrounding his prolonged detention and the differing outcomes in his other UAPA-related case are central to the Supreme Court's upcoming review.

The path to this Supreme Court hearing has been marked by several procedural complexities and judicial recusals. The Supreme Court had previously deferred hearing Gadling's bail plea, noting that the matter would need to be heard by a different bench. At one point, the case was listed before a bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar, with Justice Mishra remarking that it would need to go before “another combination” due to a “difficulty.”

Further complicating the proceedings, Justice Atul Chandurkar withdrew from the case in April when it was before a bench that also included Justice J. K. Maheshwari, though no specific reasons were provided for this recusal. Prior to this, Justice M. M. Sundresh had also recused himself from the case. Following Justice Sundresh's recusal, the matter proceeded before a bench led by Justice Maheshwari. These shifts in judicial composition underscore the intricate nature of the case and the challenges in bringing it to a conclusive hearing. The Supreme Court is now slated to hear the appeal seeking bail in the Gadchiroli case on October 14, 2026.

This development signals the Supreme Court's active engagement with bail applications in long-pending UAPA cases, offering insights into potential arguments regarding prolonged detention and differential treatment of co-accused, which could be relevant for lawyers advising clients in similar high-profile national security matters.

Source: Original reporting from legal proceedings.