The Supreme Court of India has sought a response from the Delhi Police on the petitions filed by Prabir Purkayastha, the founder and editor of NewsClick, and Amit Chakravarty, the HR head of the same organization. The petitions challenge their arrest under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra issued notices to the Delhi Police and requested their response by October 30. This comes after senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Devadatt Kamat, representing Prabir Purkayastha and Amit Chakravarty, respectively, emphasized the urgency of the matter, considering their clients are currently in jail.
On October 16, the Supreme Court agreed to expedite the listing of these petitions after Kapil Sibal brought the matter to the attention of the bench, which is presided over by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud. The CJI instructed Sibal to circulate the case papers, signaling an intention to prioritize the matter.
Previously, on October 13, the Delhi High Court had dismissed the pleas filed by Prabir Purkayastha and Amit Chakravarty against their arrest and subsequent police remand under the UAPA. Both individuals were apprehended by the Special Cell of the Delhi Police on October 3. They had moved the high court, contesting the legality of their arrest and seeking immediate release as interim relief. The court, however, rejected their pleas, citing no procedural irregularities or violations of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act in their arrest.
Following this, a trial court had remanded them to judicial custody for ten days.
The cases against Prabir Purkayastha and Amit Chakravarty are based on allegations of receiving funds to propagate pro-China content. The FIR implicates NewsClick for allegedly receiving substantial funds from China to “disrupt the sovereignty of India” and incite disaffection against the country. Additionally, it alleges that Prabir Purkayastha conspired with the People’s Alliance for Democracy and Secularism (PADS) to subvert the electoral process during the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
The Supreme Court’s decision to entertain the pleas and seek a response from the Delhi Police marks a significant development in this legal battle, underscoring the complexities of the case and the wider debate on freedom of expression and media rights in India.
Sources By Agencies
