NewsClick Founder Prabir Purkayastha Sent To One Week Of Police Remand

NewsClick founder and Editor-in-Chief, Prabir Purkayastha has been remanded to 7-days of police custody in connection with a case filed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

They were produced before the judge at his residence on Wednesday morning.

The Human Resources Head of the news portal NewsClick, Amit Chakravarty, who got arrested along with Purkayastha, has also been sent to police custody by the special court.

Purkayastha and Chakravarty got arrested after a day-long raid by the Delhi police at the NewsClick office and residences of around 40 journalists and activists connected with the news portal, following allegations that it received money for pro-China propaganda.

As many as 46 people were questioned and digital devices, including laptops, mobile phones, and documents were taken away for examination.

Senior journalists Urmilesh, Aunindyo Chakravarty, Abhisar Sharma, Paranjoy Guha Thakurta as well as historian Sohail Hashmi, satirist Sanjay Rajoura and D Raghunandan of the Centre for Technology and Development were among those questioned for over 6 hours. They were allowed to go later.

A recent New York Times report accused the website of allegedly receiving money from a US millionaire, Neville Roy Singham, for pro-China propaganda in India.
Following this, the media firm was under the scanner of the ED and Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi Police.

On August 17, a case under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other sections of IPC, including Section 153A, 120B was registered against the portal.

Opposition parties and various journalist bodies, including the Editors Guild of India, condemned the Delhi Police action, calling it an attempt to “muzzle” the press.

The Congress alleged that the Narendra Modi government imposed an “undeclared Emergency” since 2014 which has been getting “worse as it fears a loss in the 2024 elections”.

The Editors Guild stated the investigation of specific offences, “must not create a general atmosphere of intimidation under the shadow of draconian laws, or impinge on the freedom of expression and the raising of dissenting and critical voices.”