The Supreme Court Today (May 15th) held that the mandate under Pankaj Bansal v Union of India & Ors. judgment to supply written grounds of arrest to money laundering accused, will apply to cases under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) as well. The Court held the same while quashing the arrest and remand of Prabir Purkayastha, chief editor of online news portal NewsClick.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today ruled that the mandate established under the Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India & Ors. judgment, which requires supplying written grounds of arrest to individuals accused of money laundering, also applies to cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The Court made this determination while quashing the arrest and remand of Prabir Purkayastha, the chief editor of the online news portal NewsClick. The Court stated,
“We have no hesitation in holding that the interpretation of statutory mandate laid down by this Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal on the aspect of informing the arrested person the grounds of arrest in writing has to be applied pari passu to a person arrested in a case registered under the provisions of the UAPA.”
In the Pankaj Bansal judgment, issued in October of last year, the apex court ruled that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) must provide written grounds for arrest to individuals accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). This ruling emphasized the necessity for transparency and procedural fairness in the arrest process.
In today’s judgment regarding Purkayastha’s case, a bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta examined the provisions related to informing the accused of the grounds of arrest in both statutes. The bench found no significant difference in the language used in the respective sections of the PMLA and the UAPA. The Court remarked,
“Upon a careful perusal of the statutory provisions (reproduced supra), we find that there is no significant difference in the language employed in Section 19(1) of the PMLA and Section 43B(1) of the UAPA which can persuade us to take a view that the interpretation of the phrase ‘inform him of the grounds for such arrest’ made by this Court in the case of Pankaj Bansal (supra) should not be applied to an accused arrested under the provisions of the UAPA.”
The Supreme Court also observed that the modified application of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which outlines the procedure when an investigation cannot be completed within twenty-four hours, is common to both the PMLA and UAPA statutes.
Consequently, the Court reiterated that the interpretation of the statutory mandate laid down in the Pankaj Bansal judgment regarding informing an arrested person of the grounds of arrest in writing must be applied equally to individuals arrested under the UAPA.
The Court emphasized that anyone arrested under the UAPA, or any other offense, has a statutory right to be informed about the grounds of arrest in writing, and a copy of these written grounds must be provided to the arrested person at the earliest opportunity.
“The purpose of informing to the arrested person the grounds of arrest is salutary and sacrosanct inasmuch as this information would be the only effective means for the arrested person to consult his Advocate, oppose the police custody remand, and to seek bail. Any other interpretation would tantamount to diluting the sanctity of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India,”
–the Court explained.
Prabir Purkayastha was booked under the UAPA and arrested on October 3, 2023, following a series of raids prompted by allegations made in a New York Times article that claimed NewsClick was being paid to promote Chinese propaganda. NewsClick’s HR head, Amit Chakraborty, was also arrested in the same case. Chakraborty later turned approver for the prosecution and was released by the Delhi High Court, leading him to withdraw his plea before the Supreme Court against his arrest.
Purkayastha challenged his arrest and remand in the Supreme Court after the Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s decision to remand him to police custody.
This ruling reinforces the Supreme Court’s commitment to ensuring that individuals accused under various statutes, including the UAPA, are afforded the same level of procedural protection and fairness, specifically regarding the requirement to be informed in writing of the grounds of their arrest.
READ/DOWNLOAD ORDER-
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Prabir Purkayastha-NewsClick
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
