PFI man protesting denial of knowledge on causes for arrest will get FIR copy

By PTI

NEW DELHI: Copies of the FIR and arrest memo have been provided to a person arrested through the large crackdown on the Popular Front of India (PFI) earlier than it was banned, the Delhi High Court was knowledgeable on Monday, days after the accused remonstrated the denial of details about the explanations for his arrest.

The alleged (PFI) activist had moved the excessive courtroom looking for a duplicate of the FIR registered in opposition to the members of the now outlawed organisation, the grounds for arrest of every of them, and the remand functions filed by the NIA for the custodial interrogation of the accused.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta listed the matter for additional listening to on November 11 because the counsel for the accused stated the case is listed earlier than the trial courtroom later within the day and he expects the remand utility to be offered to him as his NIA custody is prone to finish.

The counsel for Mohd Yusuff, who was arrested from his residence in Chennai on September 22 within the case lodged beneath the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the stringent anti-terror legislation, additionally informed the excessive courtroom he has acquired a duplicate of the FIR after submitting the petition and that the accused will get to know the explanations for his arrest from NIA’s remand utility.

“How will we move bail application when we do not know the case against us?” advocate Adit Pujari, showing for Yusuff, stated throughout arguments.

The NIA’s counsel famous the grounds of arrest are additionally talked about within the FIR and vehemently opposed the accused’s prayer for a duplicate of the remand utility.

“The remand application is akin to our case diary. The case is at an initial stage. We are keeping it confidential as it can hamper our investigation. The procedure is that they have to first move to the special court and then come to the high court,” the NIA counsel stated.

He stated the remand utility additionally accommodates what the company is probing and, if provided to the accused, it’ll prejudice the NIA’s case.

A lot of alleged PFI activists had been detained or arrested in a number of states through the large raids previous the nationwide ban imposed on the novel Islamist outfit on September 28.

Petitioner Yusuff, who claims to be a practising advocate, had sought a route to the NIA to supply him with a duplicate of the FIR lodged by the company in Delhi on April 13, the paperwork itemizing the grounds of the arrest of every accused particular person and a duplicate of the remand functions filed by the NIA earlier than the trial courtroom.

The petitioner stated he was arrested round 3 AM on September 22 from his residence in Chennai by the NIA together with others, who all had been picked up from totally different elements of the nation and delivered to the nationwide capital in reference to the case lodged in Delhi.

“At the time of his arrest, the respondent (NIA) did not communicate to the petitioner any particulars of the offence for which he has been arrested or any grounds of such arrest in clear violation of the statutory mandate provided under Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) read with Article 22(1) of the Constitution,” the plea submitted.

ALSO READ | Delhi HC asks NIA to reply to plea for FIR copy lodged in opposition to alleged PFI members 

It stated when the accused had been produced earlier than a trial courtroom right here, their counsel sought a duplicate of the FIR lodged on September 22 in addition to on September 26.

However, the extra periods choose (ASJ) rejected the appliance filed by the petitioner on the bottom that the matter is of a delicate nature and that offering a duplicate of the FIR will hamper the investigation, the petitioner submitted.

It added Article 22(1) of the Constitution prohibits the detention of an individual arrested and in custody with out being knowledgeable of the grounds of such arrest.

The plea stated denial of a duplicate of the FIR, circumscribing the allegations and particulars of the offences in opposition to the accused individuals, is a transparent violation of the ideas of pure justice and the accused particular person’s proper to honest trial and investigation.

The authorities banned the PFI and a number of other of its affiliate organisations on September 28 for 5 years beneath the stringent anti-terror legislation UAPA, accusing them of getting “links” with world terror teams like ISIS.

NEW DELHI: Copies of the FIR and arrest memo have been provided to a person arrested through the large crackdown on the Popular Front of India (PFI) earlier than it was banned, the Delhi High Court was knowledgeable on Monday, days after the accused remonstrated the denial of details about the explanations for his arrest.

The alleged (PFI) activist had moved the excessive courtroom looking for a duplicate of the FIR registered in opposition to the members of the now outlawed organisation, the grounds for arrest of every of them, and the remand functions filed by the NIA for the custodial interrogation of the accused.

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta listed the matter for additional listening to on November 11 because the counsel for the accused stated the case is listed earlier than the trial courtroom later within the day and he expects the remand utility to be offered to him as his NIA custody is prone to finish.

The counsel for Mohd Yusuff, who was arrested from his residence in Chennai on September 22 within the case lodged beneath the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the stringent anti-terror legislation, additionally informed the excessive courtroom he has acquired a duplicate of the FIR after submitting the petition and that the accused will get to know the explanations for his arrest from NIA’s remand utility.

“How will we move bail application when we do not know the case against us?” advocate Adit Pujari, showing for Yusuff, stated throughout arguments.

The NIA’s counsel famous the grounds of arrest are additionally talked about within the FIR and vehemently opposed the accused’s prayer for a duplicate of the remand utility.

“The remand application is akin to our case diary. The case is at an initial stage. We are keeping it confidential as it can hamper our investigation. The procedure is that they have to first move to the special court and then come to the high court,” the NIA counsel stated.

He stated the remand utility additionally accommodates what the company is probing and, if provided to the accused, it’ll prejudice the NIA’s case.

A lot of alleged PFI activists had been detained or arrested in a number of states through the large raids previous the nationwide ban imposed on the novel Islamist outfit on September 28.

Petitioner Yusuff, who claims to be a practising advocate, had sought a route to the NIA to supply him with a duplicate of the FIR lodged by the company in Delhi on April 13, the paperwork itemizing the grounds of the arrest of every accused particular person and a duplicate of the remand functions filed by the NIA earlier than the trial courtroom.

The petitioner stated he was arrested round 3 AM on September 22 from his residence in Chennai by the NIA together with others, who all had been picked up from totally different elements of the nation and delivered to the nationwide capital in reference to the case lodged in Delhi.

“At the time of his arrest, the respondent (NIA) did not communicate to the petitioner any particulars of the offence for which he has been arrested or any grounds of such arrest in clear violation of the statutory mandate provided under Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) read with Article 22(1) of the Constitution,” the plea submitted.

ALSO READ | Delhi HC asks NIA to reply to plea for FIR copy lodged in opposition to alleged PFI members 

It stated when the accused had been produced earlier than a trial courtroom right here, their counsel sought a duplicate of the FIR lodged on September 22 in addition to on September 26.

However, the extra periods choose (ASJ) rejected the appliance filed by the petitioner on the bottom that the matter is of a delicate nature and that offering a duplicate of the FIR will hamper the investigation, the petitioner submitted.

It added Article 22(1) of the Constitution prohibits the detention of an individual arrested and in custody with out being knowledgeable of the grounds of such arrest.

The plea stated denial of a duplicate of the FIR, circumscribing the allegations and particulars of the offences in opposition to the accused individuals, is a transparent violation of the ideas of pure justice and the accused particular person’s proper to honest trial and investigation.

The authorities banned the PFI and a number of other of its affiliate organisations on September 28 for 5 years beneath the stringent anti-terror legislation UAPA, accusing them of getting “links” with world terror teams like ISIS.