‘Comical’: HC Slams Prison Officials’ Move to Label Wodehouse Book for Navlakha ‘Security Risk’

The Bombay HC was also unimpressed by the fact that the prosecutor did not address Gautam Navlakha’s allegations of having been denied basic rights in jail.

New Delhi: The Bombay high court has expressed frank surprise at Taloja prison officials’ decision to not allow Elgar Parishad accused Gautam Navlakha to access a book by one of the world’s most well-known English humour novelists, P.G. Wodehouse, by calling it a security risk.

Navlakha, one of the 16 activists, journalists and lawyers imprisoned over what the National Investigation Agency has claimed are their connections with the Elgar Parishad violence, was also refused glasses, a chair and other books, LiveLaw has reported.

A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and G.A. Sanap took a dim view of the Maharashtra government’s inability to tackle such allegations of highhandedness against the prison officials.

“Can you believe the prison officials didn’t allow Gautam Navlakha a book authored by humorist PG Wodehouse? They said it’s a security risk,” Navlakha’s lawyer Yug Mohit Chaudhry said. Chaudhry was arguing for Navlakha to be granted house arrest.

“PG Wodehouse is considered a security threat? That’s quite comical,” Justice Shukre said. The judge added that Marathi writer Purushottam Laxman Deshpande (popular as ‘Pula Deshpande’), was also inspired by Wodehouse.

Wodehouse’s many books largely dealt with the dour and comedic habits of British people. He died in 1975.

The book eventually reached Navlakha after an order by a trial court’s, Chaudhry said.

The Wire has earlier reported how Navlakha had sought two books, The World Of Jeeves and Wooster by Wodehouse and Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States by James C. Scott.

His glasses, too, were only given to him after his family issued a press release and the high court slammed the authorities.

Navlakha’s chronic back pain would have been alleviated with a chair, which was also denied,” his lawyer said.

In addition to having been denied basic rights, Navlakha’s lawyer also highlighted the fact that the circumstance of his incarceration are brutal.

In spite of the fact that Navlakha has no antecedents, was a respected journalist and is in his seventies, a stay in an overcrowded prison with “2,766 inmates despite an official capacity of 2,124” was made out instead of house arrest, Chaudhry said.

He also cited the death of Father Stan Swamy, one of the 16 arrested in the case, who passed away last year after testing positive for COVID-19 while in jail.

“We have seen what has happened to Father Stan. If your lordships (coordinate bench) would have not given Varavara Rao bail, he would have died. He was an inch away from death,” Chaudhry said, adding, “Is this how human beings are treated? This is not a concentration camp.”

While most of the 16 arrested are senior citizens – some with serious medical conditions – poet Varavara Rao the first to be granted bail, on medical grounds, in the case. Later, lawyer Sudha Bharadwaj was also granted bail. Multiple bail pleas filed by the others have been rejected.

Similar to Navlakha’s case, in early 2021, a special NIA court had to step in to allow Bharadwaj to access five books a month from outside the Byculla prison.

“I don’t want to die like Father Stan. I want to live so that I can clear my name, stand trial and prove my innocence,” Navlakha wrote in a complaint read out by Chaudhry in court.

In the case of Stan Swamy, lawyers had to move the court seeking permission for him to use a straw and sipper in prison to drink water, as he cannot hold a glass because he has Parkinson’s disease. The Taloja jail authorities obliged, but after nearly one month.

The court came down heavily on the prosecutor arguing Taloja Prison officials, noting that he had neither dealt with these allegations in their affidavit and nor was a counsel present in court.

The bench mulled calling in the Additional Chief Secretary in charge of prisons, LiveLaw has reported.

“This is not right. The way the state’s affidavit has been filed. Allegations are not dealt with,” Justice Shukre said.

The judge said that the prison officials’ reply offers the impressions that the allegations of negligence are true and asked the AG to look into the matter.

State Counsel Sangeeta Shinde eventually appeared and said an apology would be given in writing.