SC terms NewsClick founder’s arrest illegal, orders his immediate release
- ‘5 of 10 poll guarantees fulfilled’: CM Sukhu responds to PM Modi’s criticism on unkept promises - November 4, 2024
- Himachal CM reviews performance of his ministers, seeks to highlight welfare schemes - November 4, 2024
- 3 Punjab women arrested for chain snatchings at Kangra bus stand - November 4, 2024
Says absence of remand copy renders arrest null and void
Calling his arrest by the Delhi Police under the anti-terror law as illegal, the Supreme Court has ordered the immediate release of NewsClick founder Prabir Purkayastha.
Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta said that the absence of a remand copy in the case rendered the arrest null and void. “There is unequivocal certainty in the court’s mind that the grounds of arrest were not provided, thereby nullifying the arrest. The appellant is entitled to release from custody following the precedent set in the Pankaj Bansal case. The remand order stands invalidated,” said Justice Mehta.
The apex court had previously mandated that the grounds of arrest be formally communicated to the accused, as per its March ruling in the Pankaj Bansal case. The trial court will now be tasked with imposing bail conditions on Purkayastha.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, representing the Delhi Police, argued that while Purkayastha’s arrest had been deemed void, it didn’t impede their legitimate authority to make arrests. Justice Gavai retorted, “Whatever powers you’re entitled to exercise under the law, you may do so.”
On April 30, the Supreme Court had questioned the Delhi Police’s swift presentation of Purkayastha before the magistrate without notifying his legal counsel after the arrest. The top court also expressed surprise that the remand order was issued even before his lawyer received the remand application.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Purkayastha, highlighted that his client was arrested on October 3 and brought before the magistrate at 6 am the following day. Only legal aid attorneys and the additional public prosecutor were present, with Purkayastha’s lawyer left uninformed. When Purkayastha objected, the investigating officer notified his lawyer via phone, and the remand application was sent via WhatsApp, Sibal noted.
Asserting the principles of natural justice, the Bench stressed the necessity for Purkayastha’s lawyer to be present during the remand order’s issuance. Purkayastha was detained on October 3 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, shortly after a New York Times probe alleged NewsClick’s receipt of funds from a network linked to Chinese propaganda.
In a voluminous March chargesheet, which spanned 8,000 pages with annexures, the Delhi Police accused NewsClick and Purkayastha of terrorist financing and promoting Chinese propaganda. Additionally, NewsClick’s HR head, Amit Chakravarty, was detained on October 3 but was permitted to become an approver in the case in January.
