Delhi High Court extends interim protection to Newsclick and its Founder Prabir Purkayastha till September 2 in a Money Laundering case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday extended the interim protection granted to Newsclick and its Founder Prabir Purkayastha till September 2 in relation to an FIR filed in a money laundering case.

The Single Judge bench of Justice Mukta Gupta today also pulled up the Enforcement Directorate for not supplying a copy of the ECIR as sought by the petitioners.

Advocate Amit Mahajan appearing for ED sought adjournment.

Justice Mukta Gupta said "You have to take a stand Mr Mahajan. You cannot be dilly dally. Why are you not giving the ECIR?

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for the petitioners said "Here they have committed that they will issue the ECIR. They should then file an affidavit stating why they don’t want to give us the ECIR. I have already been granted anticipatory bail in the main matter. How can the ED arrest me".

The Court accordingly adjourned the matter till September 2 with a direction that no coercive action to be taken against the petitioners till the next date of hearing.

The Court has also directed the ED to provide to the petitioners a copy of the ECIR.

The Court had earlier granted interim protection to NewsClick and Purkayastha till July 29.

The Court had also earlier issued notice in a separate petition by the news portal seeking quashing of the case lodged by the Economic Offence Wing, on which the Court had sought response from the Delhi Police.

Consequent to an FIR lodged by the Delhi Police, the Enforcement Directorate had raided Newsclick’s offices and the homes of its editors in February of this year and conducted search and seizure activities at the said premises.

The FIR alleged that Newsclick  received Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to the tune of Rs 9.59 crores from one M/s Worldwide Media Holdings LLC USA during the year 2018-19 which was made by overvaluing the shares of the company.

It was further alleged  that over 45 per cent of the said  investment was siphoned off for the payment of salary/consultancy, rent and other expenses, alleged to have been made for ulterior motives.

The company is therefore alleged to have violated the FDI and other laws thereby causing loss to the government exchequer.

 

Case Title: PRABIR PURKAYASTHA Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT / M.S. PPK NEWSCLICK STUDIO PVT. LTD & ANR Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR