NewsClick Editor Seeks FIR Quashing

Kapil Sibal’s Plea for FIR Quashing in NewsClick Editor Case Gains Urgent Hearing

The Delhi High Court presided over by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, has agreed to hear a plea today filed by senior lawyer Kapil Sibal. The plea seeks to quash the FIR registered by the Delhi Police’s special cell under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, accusing NewsClick editor-in-chief Prabir Purkayastha and human resources head Amit Chakravarty of allegedly receiving money for pro-China propaganda.

#NewsClick editor Prabir Purkayastha moves Delhi HC seeking to quash FIR under UAPA https://t.co/AqVL7IwtF3 pic.twitter.com/vudu3OEORT

— Hindustan Times (@htTweets) October 6, 2023

Sibal Urgently Requests a Hearing

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the petitioners, requested an urgent hearing, asserting that the arrests were made illegally and in violation of Supreme Court decisions. The court, also comprising Justice Sanjeev Narula, acceded to the request and scheduled the matter for a hearing on Friday.

Read more:-Supreme Court Ponders Kashmir Article 370 Repeal: A Constitutional Conundrum

On Tuesday, Purkayastha and Chakravarty were arrested by the special cell of the Delhi Police, and the NewsClick office in Delhi was sealed. The portal is accused of receiving funds to promote pro-China content.

BREAKING: Founder and Editor-in-Chief of NewsClick, Prabir Purkayastha through his legal team moves Delhi's Patiala House Court seeking copy of the First Information Report against him to be supplied to him. pic.twitter.com/jZxwEnbPdV

— Law Today (@LawTodayLive) October 4, 2023

Court Orders FIR Copy

In a related development, a trial court on Thursday directed the Delhi Police to provide the accused with a copy of the FIR, citing Supreme Court and Delhi High Court orders from 2016 and 2010, respectively. The court allowed the applications and instructed the investigating officer to provide a certified copy of the FIR to the accused as per legal requirements.

During the proceedings, Chakravarty’s advocate argued that while the alleged offences under the UAPA were serious, there were no statutory grounds to deny the accused a copy of the FIR. Purkayastha’s counsel asserted that it was the accused’s right to obtain a copy of the FIR.

Read more:-Fake Videos Case: Supreme Court Turns Down YouTuber’s Plea!

Sensitivity Cited

Special Public Prosecutor Atul Shrivastava opposed the applications, citing the sensitive nature of the case and the ongoing initial stage of the investigation. He referred to a Supreme Court judgment, noting that if an accused is denied a copy of the FIR due to its sensitive nature, the accused must first approach the police commissioner, who would then establish a committee within eight weeks to consider the request. Shrivastava argued that the accused needed to follow the step-by-step procedure prescribed by the apex court.

Shrivastava also stated that the grounds for arrest and the reasons for further remand had already been provided, and the provisions had been duly complied with. He emphasized that the accused were accused of undermining the unity and territorial integrity of the country and engaging in discussions regarding a map of India without Kashmir while showing Arunachal Pradesh as a disputed area. The accused allegedly received ₹115 crore under the guise of foreign funding.

Liked this post?
Register at One World News to never miss out on videos, celeb interviews, and best reads.