One may not like Arnab's ideology but we have to send message: SC

Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami

Holding that the Bombay High Court was incorrect in not granting bail, the Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim bail to Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami and two others in connection with the 2018 abetment to suicide case.

A vacation bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud and also comprising Justice Indira Banerjee ordered the release of Goswami and two other accused on interim bail on a bond of Rs 50,000 and directed the Commissioner of Police to ensure the order is followed immediately.

Also read: BJP didn't support Amit Shah like 'Mahatma' Arnab Goswami: Shiv Sena

Justice Chandrachud, during the hearing, observed that they are seeing dozens and dozens of cases where district courts, high courts do not grant bail. "If we as a constitutional court do not lay down law and protect liberty then who will? You may not like his (Arnab) ideology... But if a citizen is sent to jail, if high courts don't grant bail. We have to send a strong message," the judge said.

The bench, which was hearing a petition filed by Goswami seeking bail and challenging the November 9 order of the Bombay High Court refusing relief, also directed Goswami and others to cooperate with the investigation in the case.

"They shall not make any attempt to influence witnesses," the bench said and added that personal bond should be executed before the jail superintendent. During the hearing, senior advocate Harish Salve appearing for Goswami claimed his client was being targeted and listed various cases and actions against Goswami by the Maharashtra government and the police.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Maharashtra government, asked how can bail be granted only on the basis of FIR. "The FIR it is information, either you probe it or quash it. It is not an encyclopedia. An investigation is in progress. Today there is evidence on record. There cannot be a grant of bail without looking at the evidence. The court is not allowing us to file the papers. There is a judicial remand order. There is an investigation," he said.

Also read: Arnab's arrest: Selective listing of bail plea, says Supreme Court Bar Association chief

Sibal said the court should wait for day after tomorrow and not lay down this precedence and added that when extraordinary orders are passed in extraordinary cases, it has repercussions. "How do you decide the intention in a suicide case? Only on facts and evidence. This cannot be a principle that the Court will grant bail just reading the FIR, this principle will be followed in all high courts. The investigation is going on. Remand is ordered. Now, the court cannot tell that read the FIR and see if offence made out to grant bail. It's a dangerous precedent," he added.

Sibal also mentioned that recently Siddiqui Kappan, a journalist from Kerala who went to cover the Hathras incident, was arrested by the Uttar Pradesh Police. Sibal said the journalist had approached the top court but was asked to go to the high court and asked to come again if he does not get bail.

Appearing for Mumbai Police, senior advocate Amit Desai said if this court makes an exception, it will have grave ramifications on the administration of the criminal justice system. "If every accused comes and says FIR does not disclose an offence and bail be granted then it will be a different situation of courts and it will disrupt the entire scheme of the criminal justice system," Desai said. He also questioned why did Goswami not move a court to quash the FIR in 2018?

Responding to it, Salve said it is being argued that a citizen's liberty is not important and procedural hierarchy has to be given importance. "Goswami has been arrested on the basis of FIR. The magistrate has nothing more. They will do what they are doing in TRP scam case, they will get someone to make witnesses," he added. Claiming that the re-investigation ordered by Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh was illegal and ultra vires, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for co-accused Nitesh Sarda, said a minister had no jurisdiction to sit over a court order.

Senior advocate CU Singh, appearing for victim Anvay Naik's wife, said they were never served the closure report on the investigation, which he claimed is mandatory, and added "we didn't know about it till May and only got to know about it through a tweet".

"The sentiments expressed by this court is to be cherished by all. But here it's not about Goswami but because of the fact that he has already moved a bail application yet to be heard. What kind of a message will it send and short circuit an entire process?" he pointed out.

Justice Chandrachud said pointing out that a strong message needs to be sent if a state is targetting an individual. "Our democracy is extraordinarily resilient. Governments must ignore all this. This is not the basis on which elections are fought," he said.

On November 4, Goswami and two others were arrested in connection with the 2018 suicide case. Later, they were sent to 14-day judicial custody by a lower court later that day. The suicide case, in which a closure report was filed in 2019, was reopened after Naik's wife Akshata approached a court. In September this year, Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh had ordered a re-investigation into the case after a fresh complaint by Naik's daughter.

Keep scrolling to read more news

Catch up on all the latest Crime, National, International and Hatke news here. Also download the new mid-day Android and iOS apps to get latest updates.

Mid-Day is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@middayinfomedialtd) and stay updated with the latest news

This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever