An FIR was filed against nine students, including Abhirup Paul, based on a complaint by TISS that an unauthorised event was held on the campus on October 12, 2025, to commemorate the first death anniversary of Delhi University professor Saibaba, who had spent nearly a decade in a Nagpur jail after being accused of links with Maoists
Mumbai: Observing that prima facie there is no material to connect him to activities against the unity of the nation, a magistrate’s court on Thursday granted bail to former student of Tata Institute of Social Sciences Abhirup Paul (32), arrested a month ago in a case stemming from an unauthorised campus event to pay homage to the late Delhi University professor G N Saibaba last year. Seven students, except Paul and Kamakhya Das (23), were granted anticipatory bail in August after the court found that the allegations against them were largely confined to participation at the event. Paul was arrested on August 7 after his anticipatory bail plea was rejected by the sessions court.
“The interrogation against the accused is carried out for a sufficient period and in such circumstances, no further custody of the accused is required…,” the magistrate said. He also cited the interim relief from arrest granted to co-accused Das by Bombay high court.
However, prima facie there is no material against the accused to connect him against the unity of nation,” additional chief judicial magistrate Dattatray Shankarrao Khedekar said. “Prima facie, except suspicion, there is no material to link the activities of the accused with mindset of Maoist or against the nation or associating with banned organisation against India…considering the allegations against the accused, prima facie, I am of the view that the investigating officer had got sufficient time for investigation of the offence and the activities of the accused. The prosecution alleged that the participants had raised slogans, including demands for the release of former student activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, who are facing trial under the UAPA.
The magistrate clarified that all observations were limited to deciding bail and “shall not influence the court in the way of decision of case on its own merit”.