Today(on 16th April), Delhi Police confirmed acquiring necessary sanctions under UAPA and CrPC for the NewsClick Case prosecution. The Special Public Prosecutor presented three sanction orders as part of a supplementary chargesheet. The case was postponed until April 30, 2024, with emphasis on thorough examination of the 8,000-page chargesheet. Newsclick and its founder are accused of promoting pro-China propaganda.
On Wednesday (10th April): The Punjab government informed the Supreme Court that it will temporarily suspend the trial of Congress MLA Sukhpal Singh Khaira in a 2015 drug case. Khaira filed a plea challenging his arrest, which was initially deemed lawful. The court adjourned the matter for four weeks, with the government assuring that the trial will not proceed until the next hearing.
Today (30th March): The Delhi Police filed a chargesheet against NewsClick under UAPA for propagating pro-China content. The chargesheet accuses the organization of spreading propaganda favorable to China’s interests and engaging in the dissemination of pro-China narratives for financial gain. The case also involves the arrest of NewsClick’s founder and HR head.
A Delhi court criticized the slow progress of the NewsClick case, involving alleged illegal funding from China, under the UAPA. Only two arrests were made over 150 days, leading to doubts about the investigation’s efficacy. The court granted a 20-day extension and raised concerns about evidence tampering if suspects are not timely apprehended.
Adarsh Scam | Former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan’s departure from Congress to join BJP, amidst the Adarsh Housing Society scandal, sparks speculation. The scandal involved the illegal allocation of apartments to politicians and officials. Chavan, accused in the case, denies any link between his resignation and past controversies. The Supreme Court’s upcoming hearing intensifies interest in the unfolding political and legal developments.
The Supreme Court of India ruled that a Judicial Magistrate cannot consider a supplementary charge-sheet without new evidence. The decision highlighted concerns over reliance on private lab reports and emphasized the need for fresh evidence in criminal proceedings. The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside previous orders and reinforcing standards of investigation and judicial scrutiny.