Gurgaon: A demand for higher wages is not an offence, and even persuading workers to raise their voice democratically for a wage hike cannot be treated as criminal, a city court has observed while granting bail to software engineer Aditya Anand. Anand, arrested on June 5, is accused of conspiring to incite workers during the April 9 labour violence at IMT Manesar.Additional sessions judge Dr Gagan Geet Kaur, while dealing with Anand’s bail plea on Saturday, said Article 19(b) of the Constitution guarantees the right to assemble peacefully without arms and Article 19(c) protects the right to form associations or unions. She noted, however, that these freedoms are subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order.“Raising demand to increase their wages/salary by workers/employees due to rising prices of daily needs and human living condition is not an offence itself and pursuing them for the same is also not an offence,” the court observed.The court distinguished the lawful wage demand from the alleged violence that followed the workers’ protest. It said that, prima facie, there was no incriminating evidence against Anand apart from mobile tower location data and disclosure statements.According to the prosecution, Anand’s mobile location showed his presence near the incident site on April 7, 8 and 9. However, the court noted that the investigating officer had admitted there was no CCTV footage or photograph showing Anand at the spot. He was not a member of the WhatsApp group of protesters, no incriminating message had been traced to his phone, and the phone had not been seized. The court said mere tower location, without corroborative evidence, could not be treated as incriminating evidence, and that whether the alleged conspiracy existed would have to be established at trial. It also noted that nothing was required to be recovered from him.The court allowed Anand’s bail application and directed his release to the satisfaction of the area/duty magistrate. It made clear that its order would have no bearing on the merits of the case.The case arose from violence at Richa Global Exports Pvt Ltd in Sector 7, IMT Manesar, where workers had been protesting for several days seeking a salary hike. The prosecution alleged that around 200-250 workers turned violent, pelted stones at management and police personnel, damaged vehicles and set govt and company vehicles on fire. Two women employees were also allegedly beaten. Anand was accused of provoking workers to commit violence against police and company officials, and of participating in vandalism, arson and damage to govt property.Anand’s counsel, advocate Gopi Chand, argued that his client was an NIT Jamshedpur-educated engineer who was neither a worker nor an employee of the company, was not named in the FIR and had no criminal antecedents. He also argued that Anand was arrested nearly two months after the FIR and had been implicated primarily on the basis of disclosure statements of co-accused. The defence further relied on the fact that 11 co-accused in the same case had already secured bail, and argued that Anand was entitled to parity.Public prosecutor Dr Sumitra, assisted by investigating officers SI Harish and ASI Sunil Kumar, opposed the bail plea. The prosecution alleged that Anand had conspired with other accused to provoke workers, and that his release could enable him to abscond, influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.
