 |
| Prabir Purkayastha and NewsClick |
Introduction
In a recent
development, the Delhi court has allowed NewsClick editor Prabir Purkayastha and
the website's HR head Amit Chakraborty to gain a copy of the First Information
Report( FIR) filed against them under the Unlawful Conditioning Prevention Act(
UAPA).
This decision comes after their arrest and amidst allegations of promoting Chinese propaganda. Let's claw into the details of this case.
NewsClick Arrests Delhi Court subventions Access to FIR Copy
The Delhi
court, on Thursday, granted the plea made by Prabir Purkayastha and Amit
Chakraborty, the crucial numbers behind
NewsClick, to gain a Copy of the FIR registered against them under
the UAPA. Despite strong opposition from the Delhi Police, fresh Sessions Judge
( ASJ) Hardeep Kaur ordered the police to furnish the FIR Copy to the indicted.
Background
The
apprehensions of Purkayastha and Chakraborty followed a series of raids
conducted after allegations arose from a New York Times composition. The
composition claimed that NewsClick was entering payments to promote Chinese propaganda. According to the
report, NewsClick was allegedly funded by a network linked with US millionaire
Neville Roy Singham for this purpose.
On October
3, both individualities were arrested
following expansive questioning and quests at
colorful locales. Still, they weren’t
handed with clones of the FIR or the remand order.
Legal Battle Ensues
Purkayastha
and Chakraborty, realizing the significance of these documents for their defence, approached the Delhi
court. The Delhi Police opposed their plea, asserting that the case was
sensitive and that withholding the FIR was within their rights.
According to
the police, the proper procedure in similar cases involves approaching the
office of the Police Commissioner, who can also establish a commission to
address grievances. Only if the FIR is still not handed can the indicted move
the court, as explained by fresh Public Prosecutor (APP) Atul Srivastava.
Advocate
Arshdeep Singh, representing Purkayastha, combated this argument, asserting
their right to obtain the FIR copy. Singh emphasized that the law easily grants
them this right and that their legal rights were being infringed upon.
He argued
that the case was formerly in its third day, making the need for the FIR Copy
critical.
Court's Decision
After
hearing arguments from both sides, the court sided with Purkayastha and
Chakraborty, granting them access to the FIR copy.
Ongoing examinations
Piecemeal
from the UAPA case, the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Delhi Police is also
probing News Click in another case. Also, the Enforcement Directorate(ED) has
registered a case against the website grounded on the EOW FIR.
Still, the
Delhi High Court has preliminarily ordered both the ED and EOW not to take coercive
way against Purkayastha and NewsClick in these cases.
NewsClick's Response
NewsClick
has vehemently denied the allegations against it. The website asserts its
independence and adherence to high journalistic norms. It refutes claims of
publishing news at the decree of any Chinese reality or Neville Roy Singham.
In the statement,
NewsClick expressed enterprises about the vicious intent behind the proceedings and stressed that no specific papers or videos have been cited as Chinese propaganda.
0 Comments