New Delhi: Delhi High Court asked the city police why need to be interrogated by the Custodian Editor NewsClick Prabir Purkayastha in the case of foreign investment after the Bank of India’s backup has a prime facie giving him to violate funding law.
“Prima facie, no delay, etc., (according to RBI).
In that case, why do you need the interrogation of the custod?” Yogesh Khanna justice asked on Thursday while hearing the anticipatory assurance application Purkayastha.
It extended temporary protection from the arrest given to him until December 17.
Investigation officer, attended the court through video conferencing, replied that he “still verifies other transactions”.
The accusation in FIR, registered by the Delhi police economy wing, is PPK NewsClick Studio Pvt Ltd receiving direct foreign investment Rs 9.6 Crore from Worldwide Media Holdings LLC, USA, in 2018-19 violates the law.
The court also extended temporary protection given to the Director of NewsClick Pranjal Pandey.
The police handed over that Rogatori letters had been sent to certain institutions abroad and their reply was awaited.
Other people are also interrogated.
The court was looking for the last reply from the police and posted this problem for the next hearing in December.
Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan, representing Purkayastha, urged the court to confirm temporary protection provided to his client on the grounds that according to the status of the police status, the RBI, which is the body concerned, “there is no delay in issuance of shares” and transactions related to foreign funding according to law.
The FIR claims that investment is made greatly seeking more companies to avoid the 26% limit on FDI on digital news websites, thus violating FDI and other laws.
Police further accused that more than 45% of these investments were transferred / sucked for payment of salary / consulting fees, rent and other fees, all carried out with hidden motives.
On July 7, the court has provided temporary protection from the arrest to Purkayastha and Pandey while directing them to join in the investigation.
On June 21, the High Court has directed the Directorate of Enforcement not to take coercive actions against the news portal and its editor leaders in connection with money laundering cases.
Is the custody of the portal head needed, ask Delhi HC
