NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court issued notice on Friday in response to a plea filed by NewsClick founder Prabir Purkayastha, challenging the First Information Report (FIR) registered against him under the anti-terror law UAPA. which is allegedly connected to the “spreading” of pro-China propaganda by the news portal.Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma has issued the notice in the matter despite the Delhi Police’s oppostion.During the hearing, Special Public Prosecutor Zoheb Hossain, representing the police, argued the offences as stated in the FIR under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) were made out and that the co-accused and NewsClick Human Resources head Amit Chakraborty has recently turned as an approver in the case while opposing the issuance of notice.As these developments take place, there is no question of quashing the FIR for the simple reason that the offence is prima facie deemed to be made out, the SPP argued.To this, Justice Sharma said, “See, If I will not issue a notice to you, then how will I look into your reply? Just now you mentioned a subsequent development, how will I read that? You’ll have to put that also for me”.”What difference does it make if I issue a notice to you, so that you can file a detailed reply along with the documents you want to rely on? Let us just issue notice,” the court added.Now the matter will taken up for the next hearing in July.Earlier this month, the high court had reserved its order on the bail plea moved by Chakraborty who became an approver in the UAPA case.The Delhi Police arrested NewsClick founder Prabir Purkayastha and Chakraborty on October 3 over the alleged involvement of the accused persons in continuous unlawful activities.The allegations in the case included undermining India’s unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity — be it protracting farmers’ protest through illegal funding or being involved in a “larger conspiracy” of illegally infusing foreign funds in India through Chinese telecom companies.According to the FIR registered by the Special Cell of the Delhi Police on August 17, this year, large amounts of funds were routed from China in a circuitous and camouflaged manner and paid news was intentionally peddled criticising domestic policies, development projects of India and promoting, projecting and defending policies and programmes of the Chinese government.In a previous hearing, Purkayastha’s counsel had vehemently opposed the Delhi Police’s charges, asking how his client as a journalist doing a critical or impartial act of journalism about the government can become any of the unlawful activities.
Source link
