The Supreme Court has extended interim protection to activist Teesta Setalvad against arrest by four more weeks in alleged fund embezzlement case.
The Bombay High Court on 11 August, 2015, granted anticipatory bail to activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand, who are being probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for alleged misappropriation of funds received from a foreign institution.
Justice Mridula Bhatkar, while refusing the CBI's plea seeking custodial interrogation of the two, noted, "Prima facie, I am unable to find any act which would bear a threat to the sovereignty and integrity of the state or threat to the security, strategic, economic or public interest."
Justice Bhatkar at that time, rejected CBI's argument that the criminal antecedents of the two activists, who have been highlighting the cause of victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots, need to be gone into before deciding on the anticipatory bail application.
"A citizen may conduct social activities and have a different point of view, which may not be liked by the government. However, in a democratic state, a citizen may have his/her different point of view and the state should protect that different point of view," the court said.
"A dissenting view cannot be termed as against the sovereignty of the state. It may be said that it is against the policy of the state. These are two different things."
The court granted anticipatory bail to each of them for Rs20,000, in case of arrest, and directed them to cooperate with the CBI and make themselves available to the probe agency as and when required, until filing of the charge sheet.
The special CBI court had, in July, rejected the plea which was challenged in the high court. Justice Bhatkar, while allowing it, took into consideration that the accused were Indians and their probability of absconding was negligible. "Prima facie, the case is relating to accounts not maintained and unavailable documents. If they are not produced, then a prosecution can be lodged and charges framed, for which custodial interrogation is not required," she said.
The CBI had, on July 8, registered a case against Setalvad and Anand, alleging that her firm Sabrang Communication and Publishing Pvt Limited (SCPPL) had received around 2.90 lakh USD in foreign donations in violation of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).
It is alleged that SCPPL was not registered under FCRA for collecting money from abroad and the amount of nearly Rs1.8 crore was, therefore, received in violation of the Act, as the organisation needed to seek prior approval from the union home ministry. The activists were not disclosing where they had utilised the funds received.
However, the activists, through their counsel Aspi Chenoy, had argued that the funds received were not donations but fees paid towards the services hired by the foreign organisation, Four Foundation. It was informed that income tax was duly deducted and no objection had been raised by the department in 2004 to 2006.
With inputs from Mustafa Plumber
