‘THE HINDU SUNDAY, APRIL 19, 2009 Krishna Iyer’s plea on behalf: of f Binayak Sen The text of letter written by Justice VR. Krishna Iyer, for ‘ner Supreme Court Judge, f0 Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, dated April 17,2009: would like tobringto your attention 2 case of grave in- justice thich is a cause of ‘much shame to Indian de- ‘mocracy® that of Dr. Binayzk Sen, the vtell known paedia- trican and defender of hu- ‘man rights ‘This good doctor has been incarcerated in a Raipur jall for nearly two years now un- der the Chhattisgarh Stale Publle Security Act, 2005. ‘Among the charges ‘against Dr. Sen, who is renowned worldwide for his public health work among the rural poor, are “treason and waging ‘war against the state.” Chhattisgarh State prose- ‘eutors claim that Binayak, as part of an unproven conspi- racy, passed on.a set ofletters from Narayan Sanyal, 2 se- nior Maoist leader who is in the Raipur jll, to Piyush Gu- ha, a local businessman with allegedly close links to the leftewing extremists, He was supposed to have done this ‘hile visiting Sanyal in prise fan both in his capacity as a human rights activist andas a doctor treating him for vari- ‘ous medical ailments. ‘The trial of Dr. Sen, which Binayak Sen began in a Raipur Sessions Court late April 2008, has, however, not thrown up even a shred of evidence to justify any of these changes against him. By March 2000, of the 88 witnesses listed for depo- sition by the prosecution a part of the original charge- sheet, 16 were dropped by the prosecutors themselves. and six declared ‘hostile’ while 61 others have deposed without corroborating any of the ac- ceusations against Dr Sen, Ir respective of the merits of the case agninst Dr. Sen, there are very disturbing ae pects to the way the trial Drocess has been carried out fofar. ‘As if all this were not ugh, D. Sen has also boon Fepeatedly dented bail by the Bilaspur High Court Gn Sep tember 2007 and December 2008). And. the Supreme Court of India rejected his special eave petition to ave the bail pplication heard be- fore it in December 2007. Given the paucity of ei dence in the fal of Dr. Sen So far, inal falness the Ral- pur court should have dis- Inised the case against him altogether by now. Certainly the weakness of the prose cation’s position should en- tik hia to a least grant of ball. Dr. Sen is a person of International standing and reputation, with a record of Impeccable "behaviour ‘throughout his dstinguibhed career In May 2008, in an lmprecedented move 22 No bet" Prize winners even Signed 2 public statement calling hima professional colleague’ and asking for his release. ‘Normally bail is refused only in eases where courts believe an accused can tam- per with evidence, prejudice ‘wituesss or runaway. ID. Sen's case none of these ap” ply, as shown by the simple fact that at the time of his arrest he chose to come to the Chhattisgarh police vol- luntarily and made no_at- tempt to abscond despite Janowing about his possible detention “Today Dr. Sen, a diabetic who is also hypertensive, is himself in urgent need of ‘medical treatment for his d- teriorating heart condition. In recent weeks his health thas worsened and a doctor appointed by the court to ex famine him recommended that he be transferred to Vel- lore for an angiography and ppethaps, if needed, an angio- plasty ot coronary artery by- pass. graft without further delay. Tnstead of recognising their social contributions, the Indian state, by wrongly branding Dr. Sen and many ‘other human rights. defen- ‘ders like him as ‘tervorists is making a complete mockery ‘of not just democratic norms and fair governance but its ‘entire anti-terrorist strategy and operations. The repeated denial of bail ‘which results in ‘punishment by trial” constitutes an even sgraver threat to Indian socie- {y. The sheer injustice in- volved will only breed ceynicisin among ordinary ci- tizens about the credibility and efficacy of Indian democ- icy itself.