[The text of the operative part of the brief order yesterday by the two-judge SC bench is as under: As an interim measure, it is directed that the appellants shall not be arrested in connection with F.I.R.being C.R. No.1 of 2014, registered with D.C.P., Crime Branch, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Judgment reserved.
The video clip on the site, for which the link is provided at sl. no. I below, is pretty much helpful - in making sense of today's SC ruling, and also the case itself. A few crucial excerpts from the reports reproduced below. I. Underlining that the accusations were confined to misuse of funds, the bench questioned Jethmalani about the rationale for invoking sections 467 (forgery for cheating) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC, and Section 72A of the Information Technology Act that related to a breach of contract. II. Jethmalani then conceded he would not press those charges. But he maintained that Section 406 of the IPC was still relevant since there was a breach of trust and Setalvad had sought to defraud the "unfortunate victims of riots by raising the money in their name". The bench responded: "Even if there may be a case made out under Section 406, what can be the need to arrest them? III. It asked what the Gujarat police's difficulty could be if Teesta was ordered to hand over all requisite documents and show up for questioning whenever required. It also made clear that anticipatory bail could not be denied on the ground that Teesta and Javed had refused to answer certain questions of police that could amount to self-incrimination. IV. He said that the Gujarat government "cannot take upon itself the task of persecuting someone who has criticised the State for its actions". He said that ***this is the seventh instance when the State lodged an FIR against her. The former six, the SC had protected her liberty, Mr. Sibal submitted.*** (Emphasis added.)] I/IV. http://www.business-standard.com/video-gallery/general/sc-reserves-judgement-on-teesta-setalvad-bail-continues-interim-relief-grant-17379/sc-reserves-judgement-on-teesta-setalvad-bail-continues-interim-relief-grant-17830.htm [Video clip: Prashant Bhushan, a senior Supreme Court lawyer, lucidly explaining the case and today's ruling by the SC.] II/IV. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/sc-extends-interim-bail-for-social-activist-teesta-setalvad-in-alleged-financial-fraud-case/ NATION FRIDAY, FEB 20, 2015 NGO funds: Underlining liberty, SC shields Teesta, husband from arrest FRIDAY, FEB 20, 2015 NGO funds: Underlining liberty, SC shields Teesta, husband from arrest Teesta Setalvad, Supreme Court, SC Teesta Setalvad, Teesta Setalvad fraud Teesta and Javed were compelled to move the Supreme Court after the High Court rejected their anticipatory bail plea. Written by Utkarsh Anand | New Delhi | February 20, 2015 6:37 am The Supreme Court on Thursday granted protection to activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand from arrest by Gujarat police till further orders in a case of alleged fraud relating to funds received by two trusts of which they are the main office-bearers. Also Read: Rights activists question Gujarat's 'insistence' on arresting Teesta Setalvad The court also expressed an inclination to grant them bail, observing that "liberty is paramount and cannot be put on a ventilator" when custodial interrogation is not imperative. Also Read: Teesta proposes more papers, HC disposes During an almost two-hour-long hearing, a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Adarsh K Goel asked Gujarat police to explain why custodial interrogation was needed for Setalvad and Anand in a case that "prima facie appeared to be a case of mismanagement of fund" and could not be called a "serious and big scam". Also Read: New SC bench to hear bail plea in Teesta case "Liberty is paramount for us. Liberty is on one hand and on the other hand are the allegations, nature of the crime and its impact. There may be financial irregularities or alleged embezzlement of funds, as mentioned in the FIR, but is it a case where liberty of a person is to be curtailed?" the bench asked senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, who appeared for Gujarat police. Also Read: Charges relate to salaries for family, credit card purchases The Gujarat police, however, pleaded with the court not to show indulgence to those who had shown "arrogance" and "contempt for the law", and claimed that granting bail could mean laying down a new jurisprudence in criminal law and reduce custodial interrogation to a "mere euphemism". The case involves funds received by Sabrang Trust and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) for building a memorial at the Gulbarg Co-operative Housing Society (GCHS) in Ahmedabad for victims of the 2002 riots in Gujarat. While senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who represented Setalvad and Anand, was required to argue for bail only for a few minutes at the beginning, Jethmalani argued for most of the hearing as the bench kept asking him to justify the need for custodial interrogation. Jethmalani contended that police had received a complaint in February 2013 from 12 residents of GCHS, accusing Teesta of defrauding them and misusing funds meant for the memorial. He claimed that police were "careful" and lodged an FIR almost a year later, in January 2014, since Teesta and Javed allegedly did not cooperate with the investigators and sought to tamper with the witnesses. ***Underlining that the accusations were confined to misuse of funds, the bench questioned Jethmalani about the rationale for invoking sections 467 (forgery for cheating) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC, and Section 72A of the Information Technology Act that related to a breach of contract.*** [Emphasis added.] ***Jethmalani then conceded he would not press those charges. But he maintained that Section 406 of the IPC was still relevant since there was a breach of trust and Setalvad had sought to defraud the "unfortunate victims of riots by raising the money in their name". The bench responded: "Even if there may be a case made out under Section 406, what can be the need to arrest them?*** [Emphasis added.] Who the petitioner is, is absolutely irrelevant for us. It is a question of liberty. Liberty is not absolute and it has to be balanced. But at the same time, it cannot be put on a ventilator in an ICU." ***It asked what the Gujarat police's difficulty could be if Teesta was ordered to hand over all requisite documents and show up for questioning whenever required. It also made clear that anticipatory bail could not be denied on the ground that Teesta and Javed had refused to answer certain questions of police that could amount to self-incrimination.*** [Emphasis added.] Opposing this, Jethmalani said if the court chose to condone the conduct of the accused in this case, "it will give a license to everyone to treat police with contempt." He further argued that laying down a law in this fashion would result in a dead end for all investigations since an accused would not be obliged to answer anything. The bench, however, remained unimpressed and asked Sibal if his clients were ready to fully co-operate. Sibal responded that he was ready to provide an undertaking that Teesta and Javed would adduce all the documents and assist in the probe. Stating that it would pass a detailed order later and that judgement was being reserved on the bail plea, the bench added that it would also allow police to move court for cancellation of bail in case of breach of conditions by the couple. The bail plea was heard by the new bench less than a week after a bench of Justices S J Mukhopadhaya and N V Ramanna, while hearing the plea, dubbed the allegations against Teesta as "grave". [The site has a box item, showing the chronology of the case, and facsimiles of three tweets which do not appear above. For these one has to visit the site.] III/IV. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/stay-on-teesta-setalvads-arrest-continues/article6912428.ece Updated: February 19, 2015 16:05 IST Stay on Teesta Setalvad's arrest continues KRISHNADAS RAJAGOPAL Personal liberty cannot be put on the ventilator in an ICU, says the Supreme Court Remarking that "personal liberty cannot be put in the ventilator", the Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment on a plea for anticipatory bail by activist Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand in the Gulbarg society embezzlement case, while continuing with its interim stay on her arrest. "Give me liberty or give me death. Personal liberty is paramount. No one will barter his or her liberty for all the teas in China, for all the pearls in the sea and for all the stars in the sky," Justice Dipak Misra, who led the bench also comprising Justice A.K. Goel, conveyed to Gujarat police the importance of what Ms. Setalvad is seeking from the highest court. Arguments started with senior advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for Ms. Setalvad saying that no citizen or State is above the law. ***He said that the Gujarat government "cannot take upon itself the task of persecuting someone who has criticised the State for its actions". He said that this is the seventh instance when the State lodged an FIR against her. The former six, the SC had protected her liberty, Mr. Sibal submitted.*** [Emphasis added.] Mr. Sibal challenged the Gujarat government to point to one entry in the 11,000 pages of documents submitted in court that showed that Ms. Setalvad had routed money collected from foreign donors in the names of the 2002 riot victims for her personal expenses. He branded the state's enquiry as "roving". Justice Misra asked Gujarat counsel Mahesh Jethmalani whether "this is a case in which personal liberty should be taken away... it may be a case in which there may be irregularities in accounts. But what is there to warrant a personal interrogation?" Mr. Jethmalani appearing for the Gujarat government denied any malafide on the part of the State. He said the police had received complaints received from 12 Gulbarg residents on March 12, 2013 and launched a preliminary enquiry into the allegations. "We did not harass anybody," Mr. Jethmalani submitted. He accused Ms. Setalvad of "rank non co-operation and tampering with witnesses". Here Mr. Sibal rose to challenge him : "Show it. Prove it." Mr. Jethmalani read out the riot victims' complaint, in whcih he quoted how they were "fed up of her false promises" to build a memorial for Gulbarg victims and buy their houses at a fair value. The senior counsel said setalvad's trust collected over Rs. 8 crore through donations despite their protests to stop. He said how when the pressure from the victims peaked, Ms Setalvad had told them that the money collected for the museum was not enough and the victims could sell their houses on their own. "You say you are a trustee acting for the victims but when the shoe is on the other foot, you turn tail," Mr. Jethmalani submitted. He further accused Ms Setalvad of "arrogance" shown to the investigating agency. To this, Justice Misra asked whether Ms. Setalvad had not come on any day she was summoned by the police. Here, Mr. Jethmalani replied that she was called twice and she had come on both occasions. "But she had stock answers for all our questions, " the senior counsel added. "There may be basically a mismanagement of accounts," Justice Misra orally observed. Justice Misra further observed that stalvad is obliged under law to provide all documents to the probe agency and merely to secure these records her personal liberty need not be taken away. "You don't act smart. Produce all the documents," Justice Misra turned to Mr. Sibal. Mr. Sibal agreed to produce documents relevant, but submitted that the police should not use this FIR into an enquiry "into everything" about Setalvad's Trust. The hearing concluded with a short order from the bench extending its protection from arrest. IV. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-extends-stay-on-arrest-of-Teesta-Setalvad-and-her-husband/articleshow/46297303.cms SC extends stay on arrest of Teesta Setalvad and her husband TNN | Feb 19, 2015, 12.39 PM IST NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Thursday extended the stay on arrest of Teesta Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand in a case of alleged embezzlement of funds for a museum at Ahmedabad's Gulbarg Society that was devastated in the 2002 riots. The top court had earlier stayed their arrest till February 19. The top court directed Setalvad and her NGOs to provide list of documents and means of donors as sought by Gujarat police. The apex court said if Teesta and her husband did not cooperate in probe, Gujarat police can file application for cancellation of their bail. READ ALSO: In rare case, CJI sends Teesta Setalvad's bail plea to new SC bench "It is directed that the petitioners (Setalvad and her husband) will not be arrested in connection with the case," a bench comprising justices Dipak Misra and Adarsh Kumar Goel said, while reserving its judgement on their plea seeking anticipatory bail. The bench declined to give any commitment to Kapil Sibal, Teesta's counsel, whether the inquiry will be limited to post-2007 donations received by the two trusts for setting up a museum in memory of the victims or it will cover the activities of NGOs since 2002. The bench replied, "Who are we to say. You are only on anticipatory bail qua FIR." READ ALSO: Teesta Setalvad 'hounded for speaking up', feel scribes Earlier, during the hearing, SC asked Gujarat government why Teesta Setalvad and her husband were needed in custody for questioning? The top court noted that it is a matter of curtailing somebody's liberty. The Supreme Court was hearing the anticipatory bail plea of Teesta Setalvad and her husband. Earlier,Gujarat high court had refused to grant any relief to the couple in the case, following which cops were on the lookout to arrest them. In a rare decision, Chief Justice HL Dattu had assigned the anticipatory bail plea of Setalvad to a new bench even though none of the two judges on the earlier bench, which had stayed her arrest till Thursday, had sought recusal from the hearing. (With inputs from agencies) -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
