Surendra Gadling Bail Plea: Supreme Court Considers Fast-Tracking Trial in 2016 Surajgarh Arson Case

The Bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi took up the matter and discussed measures to ensure that the stalled trial moves forward without further procedural bottlenecks.

Senior Advocate Anand Grover, appearing for Gadling, submitted that the trial had suffered repeated delays and that Gadling’s production before the trial court had failed on multiple occasions. He told the Court that although Gadling was produced three times, virtual court facilities did not function, and an application forwarded to the sessions court had not been taken up at all.

Opposing the plea, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) S.V. Raju contended that there was no delay attributable to the prosecution.

The Bench, however, observed that it had examined the record and proposed a course of action to cut through the impasse. The Court suggested appointing an officer to bring the complete trial record before it, allowing both sides to inspect the material within a week. It further indicated that charges could thereafter be framed, dates fixed, and arguments advanced, with the matter being listed again after a month once the process was completed.

Responding to the proposal, Grover pointed out practical difficulties, particularly with electronic evidence, copies of which may not be readily available.

The Court asked him to inspect the record and make submissions accordingly.

Grover stressed that Gadling was incarcerated and would have to be produced first for any meaningful inspection. He argued that the record was voluminous and could not realistically be examined within a week. Emphasising the gravity of the situation, Grover told the Court that Gadling’s liberty had been curtailed for nearly seven years despite there being no case against him on merits.

Calling it a serious matter, Grover sought liberty to argue the bail plea on merits after one month if no progress was made in the trial. He expressed serious doubts given the manner in which the case had proceeded so far.

The Bench assured him that such liberty would be granted. It further said it would first verify with the registry whether a judge was presently posted in the NIA court in Mumbai, where the case is pending.

The Court added that it would pass an appropriate order after speaking to the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court to ensure that trial courts are not left vacant and that judges are duly assigned, so that the proceedings can move ahead without further delay.

Notably, in October 2025, the Court had granted one weeks time to the State of Maharashtra for filing its affidavit in the bail plea. Previously, the Court was informed by the Maharashtra government that Gadling, accused in the Surajgarh Mine Arson Case, is one of the top comrades of the Maoist organisation. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, vehemently opposed his bail plea, and told Court that the case was "of Naxalite activities...attacking our jawans..these persons have provided the logistics..in the Maoist infected areas...".

On a question posed by the Bench on evidence collected in Bhima Koregaon case being used in the present case against Gadling, ASG had submitted, "These are the documents collected in Bhima Koregaon which show his role in the Surajgarh case..150 trucks carrying minerals were stopped..It is not the law that if documents seized in one case cannot be used in different case..".

"This act of burning the trucks was carried out by Maoists..local militia or Naxalites involved..Our jawans were killed..MAOISTS ARE ANTI-NATIONALS, they are happy if our jawans are killed..Gadling is one of the top comrades of this Maoist organisation..that is why he is involved in all this..", Court was further told. ASG Raju had also told court that Naxalites thrive in underdeveloped areas, and the entire area of Gadchiroli being poor, was seeing development recently which the Naxalites did not want.

In January 2023, Nagpur Division Bench of the Bombay High Court had denied bail to Gadling in the Surajgarh Mine Arson Case.

The case pertains to an incident wherein 39 vehicles transporting iron ore to Gadchiroli were allegedly set on fire by the Maoists. An FIR was registered by the police and the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, Maharashtra Police Act, and Arms act were invoked. Surendra Gadling was arrested along with the other accused in the case. The case was then investigated by the National Investigating Agency.

Case Title: Surendra Gadling vs State of Maharashtra

Bench: Justices JK Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi

Hearing Date: January 21, 2026