NewsClick Arrests: Delhi Court Remands Prabir Purkayastha, HR Head To Judicial Custody In UAPA Case

A Delhi Court on Tuesday sent NewsClick founder Prabir Purkayastha and Human Resources head Amit Chakraborty to 10 days judicial custody in the UAPA case registered against them following allegations of the portal receiving money for pro-China propaganda.

Additional Sessions Judge Hardeep Kaur of Patiala House Courts passed the order after Purkayastha and Chakraborty were produced in court on expiry of their seven days of police custody.

At the outset of the hearing, APP Atul Srivastava submitted that the Delhi Police was seeking judicial custody for the duo and not further police custody as their physical presence is not required at this stage. He added that in case there is a need of police custody, appropriate application will be moved in court later.

Appearing for Purkayastha, Advocate Arshdeep Singh Khurana opposed the grant of judicial custody and submitted that a bare reading of Delhi Police’s FIR would show that there is no criminal offence made out, let alone a UAPA case.

He further submitted that the offences as alleged in the FIR under Section 13 and 16 of UAPA are not made out at all since there is no terrorist act or unlawful activity.

“There is no allegation that I've used nay bomb or dynamite which has caused loss of death and property. There is no allegation that I've used any criminal force in entire FIR. There is no act of kidnapping, detention or abduction. None of the acts attributed to me has any elements of Sec. 15 of UAPA,” Singh said.

He added, “I ask myself, what terrorist act have I committed? How can by reporting, by acting or by having profession as a journalist, can I commit terrorist act?….. How can an act of journalism...if I am assuming that I am doing critical or impartial act of journalism about the government, can I be said that I am committing any of these unlawful activities? UAPA is not a restriction on Article 19(1)(a). You can't be imposing these draconian laws on journalists.”

Refuting the allegations of foreign funding by China, Singh said that all the money which came to NewsClick came through banking channels which was duly reported to the Government and tax was also paid on the same.

On the other hand, Advocate Rohit Sharma appearing for Chakraborty submitted that his client’s name is not mentioned in the FIR as an accused and that he is only a 0.1% shareholder of PPK Newsclick.

“The acts which are attributed to Prabir etc relate to what they publish on newsclick website. They have not done anything else. There is allegation there is money coming in and some news is being published with a particular agenda. I have not been involved in any publication. I am not a journalist, or an editor or writer,” Sharma said.

He added: “Please see what they say in remand application. FIR doesn't name me as an accused, doesn't contain allegations against me. But in remand application....These allegations are not there in FIR.”

Purkayastha and Chakraborty were arrested on October 03. They were remanded to seven days of police custody on October 04.

Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court yesterday reserved order in the pleas moved by Purkayastha and Chakraborty challenging the trial court’s remand order. 

The allegations came to light after a New York Times report published on August 5th alleged that online media outlet NewsClick had received funds from China to create an “anti-India” atmosphere.

This was followed by a series of raids by the Delhi police into the residences of journalists and writers , both past and present, associated with Newsclick.

A statement was issued by the news portal yesterday claiming that it was not provided with a copy of the FIR, or informed about the exact particulars of the offences with which it was charged.

“Electronic devices were seized from the Newsclick premises and homes of employees, without any adherence to due process such as the provision of seizure memos, hash values of the seized data, or even copies of the data. Newsclick’s office has also been sealed in a blatant attempt at preventing us from continuing our reporting,” the statement said.

It added that Newsclick strongly condemn the actions of a Government that “refuses to respect journalistic independence, and treats criticism as sedition or anti-national propaganda.”

“Newsclick has been targeted by a series of actions by various agencies of the Government of India since 2021. Its offices and residences of officials have been raided by the Enforcement Directorate, the Economic Offences Wing of Delhi Police and the Income Tax Department. All devices, laptops, gadgets, phones, etc. have been seized in the past. All emails and communications have been analysed under the microscope. All bank statements, invoices, expenses incurred and sources of funds received by Newsclick in the last several years have been scrutinised by different agencies of the Government from time to time,” it added.

Prior to the NYT report, NewsClick was facing another investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) based on allegations of money laundering. This had initiated multiple raids by ED into the premises of the editors and the case is still pending.

NewsClick and Purkayastha had earlier approached the Delhi High Court seeking a copy of the ECIR registered by ED in September 2020 in the money laundering case, which had passed interim orders on June 21, 2021 and July 20 directing the ED not to take any coercive action against the website and its editor in chief.

Subsequently, ED had sought vacation of two orders passed by a co-ordinate bench on June 21, 2021 and July 20, 2021.