Is granting Kanhaiya Kumar Interim Bail win for Anti-Nationals at JNU? Read The Order again!
High Court clearly mentions, that granting Kanhaiya Kumar Bail is indeed conservative method of treatment. The Order is Legendary as it will be like showing mirrors to some Intellectuals in India whenever they feel confused about Freedom of expression and Anti-National Slogans.
During the period spent by the petitioner in judicial custody, he might have introspected about the events that had taken place. To enable him to remain in the main stream, at present I am inclined to provide conservative method of treatment.
People at JNU constantly questioning Indian Judicial should take a Bow
Once the decision of releasing the petitioner on interim bail is taken, now the question comes as to what should be the amount for monetary security. In his speech dated 11th February, 2016 the petitioner has claimed that his mother works as Anganbadi worker and earns ₹3000/- per month on which the entire family survives. If this aspect is considered then the amount to be required to be filled in the personal bond and surety bond cannot be so high as to put him in a position that he cannot avail the interim bail.
Though HC gives him concession basing on His Family monetary Condition but in clear and strong words orders Kanhaiya Kumar to stay away from Anti-National activities and as President of JNU Students Union, he will make all efforts within his power to control Anti-National Activities at JNU
The time is ripe that while giving some concession to the petitioner on monetary aspect for purpose of furnishing the bond, he can be required to furnish an undertaking to the effect that he will not participate actively or passively in any activity which may be termed as anti-national. Apart from that, as President of JNU Students Union, he will make all efforts within his power to control anti-national activities in the campus. His surety should also be either a member of the Faculty or a person related to the petitioner in a manner that he can exercise control on the petitioner not only with respect to appearance before the Court but also to ensure that his thoughts and energy are channelized in a constructive manner.