- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Why National Security Act Applied...
Why National Security Act Applied Against YouTuber Manish Kashyap For Fake Videos? Supreme Court Asks Tamil Nadu Govt
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
21 April 2023 1:36 PM IST
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the State of Tamil Nadu on a plea by YouTuber Manish Kashyap seeking to quash his detention under the National Security Act over allegations of spreading fake news about the attacks on Biharis in the southern state.During the hearing, a bench comprising Chief Justice of DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha questioned the need for invoking NSA...
The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to the State of Tamil Nadu on a plea by YouTuber Manish Kashyap seeking to quash his detention under the National Security Act over allegations of spreading fake news about the attacks on Biharis in the southern state.
During the hearing, a bench comprising Chief Justice of DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha questioned the need for invoking NSA for such allegations.
"Mr.Sibal, why NSA for this?", CJI asked Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who was appearing for the State of Tamil Nadu. Sibal replied that Kashyap had nearly 60 lakh followers in social media and his videos caused widespread panic and fear among migrant workers. Alleging that Kashyap was not a journalist, Sibal contended that the videos were made with a political agenda.
The bench was considering a petition filed by Kashyap, a native of Bihar, seeking to club the multiple FIRs registered over the alleged fake videos. When Senior Advocate Siddarth Dave told the bench that he has been now detained under the NSA as well, the bench gave the petitioner liberty to amend the petition to challenge the NSA detention as well. He pointed out recently, the Supreme Court had quashed the NSA detention of a SP leader in UP in a case for land revenue default.
Dave requested that the FIRs in Tamil Nadu be clubbed and transferred to Bihar, as the first FIR was lodged in Patna. Sibal opposed this by saying that the FIRs were registered over different acts. He argued that Kashyap had visited multiple places in Tamil Nadu under the guise of interviewing people and published videos, and since these are different transactions, multiple FIRs are maintainable.
The bench however commented that the 'drift' of all the FIRs appeared to be the same.
The counsel for the State of Bihar also opposed the transfer of cases to Bihar by contending that Kashyap was a habitual offender with several cases pending against him.
The bench posted the matter for next Friday and asked the respondents to file their responses in the meantime. Dave at this point told the bench that Kashyap is being produced in different courts in Tamil Nadu based on production warrants and requested that he be not dislodged from his current location till the next date of hearing. Allowing the request, the bench ordered that Kashyap be not moved from the Central Prison Madurai till the next posting date (April 28)