Updated: November 7, 2020 9:14:15 pm
Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami after his arrest, on Alibaug in Raigad on Wednesday. (Express photo: Narendra Vaskar)
The Mumbai High Court, following a special day-long hearing on Saturday by video conference, reserved final orders on the bail bond from Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami in a recorded suicide incitement case against him in May 2018. Goswami will remain in judicial custody. The court, which has been hearing the request for interim measures for three days, said it will approve the order “as soon as possible.”
Goswami has also submitted the application for provisional bail under article 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which gives special powers to the high court or the court of sessions to grant bail.
The court also said the defendants are free to request bail and ordered that it be heard and made available within four days. “We make it clear that the processing of this application will not be construed as an impediment in the event that the petitioner is able to request bail under section 439 of the CrPC to appear in court. The court concerned should decide on said request within four days after the submission of said bail declaration, ”said Division Chamber judges SS Shinde and MS Karnik.
Read also | Arnab spends the first night in a municipal school designated as a quarantine center for Alibaug prison
The Court is hearing Goswami’s habeas corpus petition for “immediate release” and suspension of the investigation along with statements from the other two defendants, Nitish Sarda and Feroz Shaikh.
The case against Goswami concerns the death of interior designer Anvay Naik and his mother Kumud Naik at their bungalow in Alibaug in May 2018. According to police officers, the duo died by suicide due to alleged non-payment of fees by the channel. Goswami Television and two other companies.
Goswami’s guilty plea stated that the arrest was carried out in “flagrant violation of Goswami’s fundamental rights to life and personal liberty” and his dignity guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
In his request for bail, Goswami made allegations of mistreatment by the police and stated: “During the course of his arrest and while being transferred to Alibaug in a police van and in police custody, the petitioner suffered a 6-inch deep damage cut left hand, severe spinal cord injury, was hit by the boot of a policeman in heavy uniform, was not allowed to wear shoes at all times, suffered vein injuries and neither He was even given access to drinking water ”.
Read | Arnab Goswami Case: Filing House Proceedings in South Carolina Without the President’s Permission Equals Violation, Official Says
The allegation further stated: “In addition, the petitioner was also forced to consume a certain liquid by the police officers who were guarding him and drowned as a result.
Leading defenders Harish Salve and Aabad Ponda, representing Goswami, requested his provisional release on the grounds that his arrest was “completely illegal”. Goswami’s lawyers, who concluded their arguments on Friday, had submitted that a closing report on FIR was submitted in 2019, which was accepted by the magistrate on the same day and a summary report was submitted. It was not contested in any court or there was no request for a protest from the informants and no recourse was exercised.
On Saturday, lawyer Vijay Aggarwal for one of the defendants, Nitish Sarda, relied on the preventive detention order approved by the Alibag Court of First Instance that denied police custody of the three arrested defendants and argued: “The warrant says that the arrest is illegal and therefore keeping them in jail is also an illegal detention. The closure report presented by the police in 2019 says that the three named in the suicide note were not connected to each other to have conspired to commit the crime. Attorney Nikhil Mengde for the defendant Feroze Shaikh agreed with Aggarwal’s arguments and sought relief.
The court asked Aggarwal: “Don’t you think that with the other remedies available, if we grant relief, then everyone will go to the higher court? The danger today is that the Superior Court is already inundated with petitions or requests for regular bail. At the same time, it will send the wrong signal that even though Section 439 is there (it also provides a recourse to the Court of Sessions for bail), why come under auto (HC) jurisdiction? It will also undermine the authority of the lower (lower court) courts. You have remedies available. “
Opposing the pleas, lead attorney Amit Desai, representing the state government, said petitioners must follow CrPC procedures and seek available remedies in the lower courts.
“There may or may not be evidence at the end of the investigation, but there cannot be a suspension. The Justice of the Peace to whom summary report A was presented in 2019, was informed that the case is being investigated, witness statements have been recorded. Petitioners can request bail before the court of first instance, which can decide on the merits, ”Desai said.
Desai further said that according to procedure, Summary Report A means that while a crime was committed, there is insufficient evidence to prove it. “Therefore, the report says that a crime was committed. The defendants to date have not challenged it before any forum. As required, the police informed the court that the investigation is continuing, ”he said.
Additionally, Lead Defender Shirish Gupte, who represents whistleblower and comptroller Akshata Naik, objected to the pleas and questioned his ability to maintain along with the urgency to give Goswami a three-day hearing and maintained that the victim’s family could suffer damages if the journalist is released.
© The Indian Express (P) Ltd
.
