19 Oct 2023 6:23 AM GMT
The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice to the Delhi Police in the pleas by NewsClick founder and editor-in-chief Prabir Purkayastha and human resources head Amit Chakraborty challenging their recent arrest.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra was hearing the special leave petitions by the duo challenging a decision of the Delhi High Court upholding their arrest by the Delhi Police in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act over alleged Chinese funding to promote anti-national propaganda. Earlier this week, this case was mentioned before Chief Justice DY Chandrachud by Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal for an urgent hearing.
Today, the court issued notice in both special leave petitions. Although it initially planned on directing the matter to be heard after three weeks, at the request of Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, the court ultimately agreed to schedule the hearing on October 30.
Background
Last week, on October 13, the Delhi High Court dismissed Purkayastha’s and Chakraborty’s pleas challenging a trial court order remanding them to seven days of police custody in the UAPA case. They had argued that the grounds of arrest had not been supplied to them in writing, with a copy of the first information report (FIR) being provided only after they approached the court. The duo placed reliance on Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Pankaj Bansal quashing arrests by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for not furnishing the grounds of arrest in writing to the detenus. On the other hand, Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta contended before the high court that while the grounds of arrest had not been supplied, the duo had been informed of them.
Ultimately, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela upheld the police remand order, holding that the grounds of arrest had been conveyed to them and as such, there was no procedural infirmity or violation of any provisions under UAPA or the Constitution. The single judge also observed that the Supreme Court’s judgment in Pankaj Bansal, directing the ED to inform the grounds of arrest in writing to the accused, cannot be said to be squarely applicable to a case arising under the UAPA.