Background

In a recent development, the Delhi High Court has taken a step in the case involving NewsClick’s founder and editor-in-chief, responding to a plea by the city police. The police are seeking to overturn a previous order that granted interim protection from arrest to Prabir Purkayastha, the prominent figure behind the news portal. The case pertains to alleged unlawful foreign funding, and the court has initiated the process to hear both sides.

Court’s Notice

Justice Saurabh Banerjee has issued a formal notice in response to the application submitted by the Delhi Police. This notice seeks a response from Prabir Purkayastha, directing him to present his reply regarding the matter. The court’s aim is to ensure a comprehensive evaluation of the situation and gather all necessary information before making any decisions.

Earlier Developments

The high court had earlier granted Prabir Purkayastha interim protection from arrest on July 7, 2021. Alongside this protection, the court also directed him to cooperate with the ongoing investigation. However, with the recent application from the police, the court’s stance on this matter is undergoing reexamination.

Ongoing Proceedings

The current application from the police is a continuation of the ongoing legal proceedings that have been set in motion by Prabir Purkayastha. He had previously filed for anticipatory bail in relation to the same case. The police, in their application, assert that NewsClick had received foreign funds for news broadcasting within India, which violates existing laws. Subsequent investigation, according to the police, has exposed the commission of offenses in this regard.

Police’s Argument

The counsel representing the Delhi Police has stated that given the gravity of the matter, the provision of pre-arrest bail should not be applicable. The police contend that the accused individuals, including Prabir Purkayastha, collaborated with foreign entities to create a deceptive strategy for receiving funds. These funds were intended to support activities as directed by foreign benefactors. The police assert that these funds were disguised as Foreign Direct Investment, emphasizing the alleged manipulation of financial transactions.

Conclusion

Delhi High Court’s move to seek a response from Prabir Purkayastha indicates its commitment to a fair and thorough evaluation of the situation. As the legal proceedings continue, the court aims to make informed decisions that uphold the principles of justice and legality.