VASCO: A massive crowd at the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) court at Vasco on Saturday was met with disappointment as controversial right-wing activist Gautam Khattar was granted conditional bail for allegedly making derogatory statements against St Francis Xavier. Protesters slammed the move, asserting that the early release sends a damaging signal to secular harmony across the State.
Rebuffing the prosecution’s concerns that Khattar’s massive social media reach could trigger further communal disharmony, the court released him on strict conditions, including a travel ban.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
Judge Pooja S Dessai ordered that Khattar be released on executing a personal bond of Rs 30,000 with two sureties of Rs 15,000 each. He has been asked to place on record names and addresses of two of his family members other than the surety and co-accused, before this Court.
Khattar has been directed not to leave the country without the prior written permission of the Court until the disposal of the present crime and further not to commit any offence especially similar to the one which he is presently suspected of committing, especially through social media posts, videos or public statements.
The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or any other authority, more particularly, audience or any suspected accused, through digital or personal reach, the Court stated.
In his bail plea, Khattar claimed his innocence, submitting that the allegations were grossly exaggerated, politically motivated, and detached from the social context of his speech. He emphasised that the offences charged do not carry a sentence exceeding seven years and since the evidence is entirely speech-based, consisting of electronic records and witness statements, there is no physical recovery required that would justify continued custodial interrogation.
The Crime Branch had vehemently opposed the bail application, contending that the applicant’s remarks were deliberate and malicious, intended to outrage religious sentiments and incite communal disharmony. Considering the sensitive nature of the matter, the investigating agency stated that the case was transferred from the Vasco Police Station to the Crime Branch for a more detailed probe.
The respondent further pointed out that the applicant initially did not cooperate with the investigation and had allegedly switched off his mobile phone to evade notice issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS. According to the Crime Branch, he was eventually traced to Himachal Pradesh with the help of technical surveillance and support
The prosecution highlighted that the investigation was at a crucial stage and requires further custodial interrogation to recover the applicant’s mobile phone, which was needed to analyse his web browsing history and determine if the speech was premeditated.
The police had already recorded witness statements from the event organisers and are awaiting forensic reports on voice samples compared against a transcript of the speech found on a pen drive. It was further submitted that the applicant’s conduct shows a complete lack of remorse and that his release would not only send a wrong signal to society but also risk the tampering of evidence and the possibility of him jumping bail.
The police stated that they could not conduct effective investigation after the initial two-day remand period as the accused was hospitalised since April 28. The police sought 14 days judicial custody of Khattar to recover electronic gadgets used in commission of the offence, with an apprehension that the accused may tamper with the digital date or influence witnesses, if released.
Opposing the bail plea, the intervener Peter D’Souza, the original complainant and a social activist described the applicant as a highly influential public figure with a social media reach running into millions across YouTube, Facebook and Instagram, allegedly using these platforms to disseminate inflammatory hate speech. The intervener further claimed that the applicant is a habitual offender and that similar offences have previously been registered against him in Noida and Kolkata in 2024. It was also contended that the event in question had been organised by the newly formed Sanatan Dharm Raksha Samiti with the alleged objective of siphoning public funds and disturbing Goa’s secular fabric ahead of the elections.
A large crowd had gathered outside the court building in the morning but the order was pronounced in the afternoon as Khattar could not be produced before the Court due to his hospitalisation.
After the order, Khattar’s lawyer Adv Amey Prabhudessai said, “We are satisfied that our client Gautam Khattar has been granted bail. The order on bail-cum-remand was reserved for Saturday as the six-day police custody was also ending,” he said.
On the other hand, Adv Seoula Vas for the intervenor said, “Assistant Public prosecutor did not press to reject bail at the time of arguments and on Saturday prayed for judicial custody, not police custody.”
Adv Melwyn Fernandes who also appeared holding for intervener submitted in Court that six days of police custody was only effectively for one-half-day as accused was in transit for two days and in hospital for three days.
