Supreme Court: PFI challenges decision to extend investigation period to 60 days, next hearing on January 25 – Pfi challenges decision to extend investigation period to 60 days

दिल्ली हाईकोर्ट


Delhi Supreme Court
– Photo: Amar Ujala

hear the news

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) was challenged by the arrested members of the organization before the Delhi High Court on Monday to give more time to complete the investigation in the case registered under the UAPA anti-terror law against the banned organization. A bench of Judge Siddharth Mridul and Judge Talwant Singh set the next hearing for January 25.

The petitioners’ counsel, Mohd Yusuf and others, called the court’s December 19 order to extend the time limit for conducting the investigation by 60 days incorrect. He said the agency was given extra time without notifying him of the prosecution’s report. The report was submitted in a sealed envelope. NIA’s counsel said that according to the Supreme Court’s previous ruling, the prosecution’s report cannot be given to a defendant in a UAPA case and that in the present case, the court has heard the defendant’s side. The applicants’ counsel states that the investigation agency has not given any specific reason for extending the investigation period.

It was also argued that filing the prosecution’s report in a sealed envelope was against the law. If, according to the UAPA, it is not possible to complete the investigation within a 90-day period, the court may extend it to 180 days. A large number of alleged PFI activists were detained or arrested in several states in mass raids prior to the nationwide ban imposed on PFI on September 28, 2022. Following this, the government banned PFI and some of its affiliates for five years under UAPA.

Lawyer is stuck in case of obstruction of legal proceedings three times
New Delhi. The Supreme Court on Monday banned a lawyer from appearing via hybrid or virtual conferencing (VC) mode three times for obstructing legal proceedings for a period of one month. Justice Pratibha M Singh said that the lawyer who appeared from his home was also playing the video. In doing so, he did not follow the decorum of the court. Directed the IT team and clerk to ensure for one month that counsel is not allowed to attend any hybrid or VC hearings.

Accused of fraud is denied early bail by securing a meeting with Amit Shah
The Supreme Court refused to grant early bail to a businessman accused of cheating a businessman out of Rs 2 crore by falsely assuring him that he would meet Union Home Minister Amit Shah in connection with a railway contract . The court said using the names of such constitutional officials to mislead the complainant exaggerated the seriousness of the crime. In such a situation, there is no reason to release the accused Anish Bansal early on bail.

Justice Swarkant Sharma said that this court also notes that the defendants used the name of the Union Home Minister to get the plaintiff to pay a huge sum. While he knew full well that the insurance given to the victim was false. The allegation adds to the seriousness of the crime that the names of such a constitutional authority and his family were used to mislead the complainant.

Denial of hearing on interim bail plea of ​​two PFI leaders
The Supreme Court denied the provisional bail application of two leaders of the banned Popular Front of India (PFI) in a money laundering case. The court told them to wait for the lower court ruling in this case. PFI’s Delhi unit president Mohd Parvez Ahmed and office secretary Abdul Muket had sought provisional bail in the case brought by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on the grounds that the agency (ED) failed to file the charge sheet within the stipulated period of 60 days from the date of arrest Found and this period was completed on November 21, 2022. His counsel Mujeeb Ur Rehman told the Supreme Court that on December 17, 2022, he (his client) applied to the court for legal bail.

Expansion

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) was challenged by the arrested members of the organization before the Delhi High Court on Monday to give more time to complete the investigation in the case registered under the UAPA anti-terror law against the banned organization. A bench of Judge Siddharth Mridul and Judge Talwant Singh set the next hearing for January 25.

The petitioners’ counsel, Mohd Yusuf and others, called the court’s December 19 order to extend the time limit for conducting the investigation by 60 days incorrect. He said the agency was given extra time without notifying him of the prosecution’s report. The report was submitted in a sealed envelope. NIA’s counsel said that according to the Supreme Court’s previous ruling, the prosecution’s report cannot be given to a defendant in a UAPA case and that in the present case, the court has heard the defendant’s side. The applicants’ counsel states that the investigation agency has not given any specific reason for extending the investigation period.

It was also argued that filing the prosecution’s report in a sealed envelope was against the law. If, according to the UAPA, it is not possible to complete the investigation within a 90-day period, the court may extend it to 180 days. A large number of alleged PFI activists were detained or arrested in several states in mass raids prior to the nationwide ban imposed on PFI on September 28, 2022. Following this, the government banned PFI and some of its affiliates for five years under UAPA.

(TagsToTranslate)Delhi News


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.