Guwahati: Akhil Gogoi, peasant leader and sitting Member of the Assam Legislative Assembly from Sivasagar, appeared in a Dibrugarh court on Monday in connection with five cases related to the 2019 protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).
Gogoi shared the court appearance update on his social media accounts earlier in the day.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
Currently serving as the president of the Raijor Dal, Gogoi has consistently voiced opposition to the CAA and the policies of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government.
The cases primarily involve charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Authorities alleged that Gogoi played a key role in organizing violent demonstrations during the anti-CAA protests.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) continues to pursue the cases, maintaining that the protests were part of a broader conspiracy to undermine national security.
In a recent development, a Special NIA Court framed charges against Gogoi and three others under various sections of the UAPA and IPC.
This followed a ruling by the Supreme Court, which upheld a Gauhati High Court decision reversing an earlier discharge order issued by the NIA court.
While the Supreme Court granted Gogoi bail pending trial, it allowed the charges to proceed.
Gogoi was first arrested in December 2019. Although the court granted him bail in one case in June 2021, the NIA later challenged the decision and successfully reinstated the charges.
Despite ongoing legal proceedings, Gogoi remains active in Assam’s political landscape, continuing his work as a legislator and political organizer.
Civil rights groups and political commentators have closely followed the case, with some arguing that the government filed the charges to suppress dissent for political reasons.
Others view Gogoi as a key figure in Assam’s protest movement.
As the trial progresses, the outcome may have broader implications for freedom of expression, political activism, and the use of national security laws in democratic contexts.