The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed Gautam Navlakha, a key figure in the Bhima Koregaon case with alleged Maoist links, to pay ₹1.64 crore to the National Investigation Agency (NIA). This decision pertains to expenses incurred by the NIA for providing security to Navlakha during his house arrest.

The bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti made the directive after it was revealed that Navlakha had sought house arrest on grounds of health issues. The court asserted that since Navlakha had requested house arrest, he should bear the expenses associated with it.

During the proceedings, Advocate Shadan Farasat, representing Navlakha, sought clarification on the latest calculation of dues payable. Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the NIA, informed the bench that Navlakha had been attempting to evade payment.

The court instructed Navlakha to submit his objections, scheduling a hearing on April 23 to further deliberate on the matter.

This latest development comes in the wake of Navlakha being granted bail by the Bombay High Court in December of the previous year, albeit with a stay order following the NIA's appeal to the Supreme Court. The stay order remains in effect.

The Supreme Court had previously expressed reservations about its decision to grant Navlakha house arrest, emphasizing that it had not addressed the merits of the case against him. Navlakha, initially placed under house arrest, was subsequently transferred to judicial custody at Taloja Central Prison following a Supreme Court order in April 2020.

Navlakha's arrest dates back to August 28, 2018, when he was apprehended by Pune police in connection with the Elgar Parishad case. His subsequent legal battles have drawn attention to issues of security expenses and the broader implications of his alleged involvement in the Bhima Koregaon incident.

Senior Advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, representing Navlakha, contested the NIA's calculation of expenses, decrying the demand as "extortion." The case continues to unfold amidst ongoing legal proceedings and debates surrounding civil liberties and national security concerns.

Case: National Investigation Agency vs. Gautam Navlakha.