Published 00:20 IST, November 12th 2020
'Jail is an exception not a rule': Here is Harish Salve's powerful defence of Arnab in SC
The Supreme Court's hearing on the bail plea of Republic Media Network's Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami saw some key arguments by senior advocate Harish Salve.
The Supreme Court's hearing on the bail plea of Republic Media Network's Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami witnessed some key arguments by senior advocate Harish Salve. Arguing against the Bombay High Court's order rejecting Arnab's bail petition, Salve focused on several aspects such as how no case of abetment to suicide was made out, closure report, the illegality of the reinvestigation, malice on part of the state and the Chief Judicial Magistrate's observations. After hearing all the sides, the SC bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Indira Banerjee granted him interim bail. Most importantly, it ruled that the Bombay HC was in error in rejecting the application for grant of interim bail.
Here are some of Salve's key arguments:
Salve informed the SC that an offence of abetment to suicide is not attracted in the present case. He said, “The person was in financial difficulty and, thereafter, committed suicide but how can it be abetment to suicide. For abetment there must be direct and indirect act of the commission of the offence. If tomorrow, a person commits suicide in Maharashtra and blames Government, then will the Chief minister be arrested?”
Moreover, he listed all cases filed against Arnab and pointed out that no offence was made out in any of them. Taking the apex court through the pattern of vendetta against Arnab, Salve highlighted how Hansa Research Group was being coerced to make statements against Republic TV which is evident from the writ petition filed in the Bombay HC by the latter. He also raised concerns over his client's transfer in the Diwali week.
He stated, "Challenge to TRP is still pending. Mumbai Police is accused of coercing witnesses. 7 days the man is being incarcerated. Look at the discussion in the assembly. it shows the political system is angry with me (Arnab)."
Citing that jail cannot be the rule, the senior advocate stressed, “Let us assume there is an FIR which is three years old why will you arrest him and then put him in Taloja with hardened criminals. Is Goswami a terrorist, is there a murder charge on him? This cannot be assumed to be yet another criminal case. Will heavens fall if this man is released. Jail is an exception, not a rule."
Meanwhile, it was Salve's contention that the case can be reinvestigated only after a judicial order. According to him, the reinvestigation is illegal as Maharashtra Home Minister Anil Deshmukh had directed the DGP in this regard. He added that it was a dangerous precedent for the executive to order a re-investigation after the Magistrate has accepted the A Summary Report.
“The A Summary Report (Closure) needs to be first set aside in a judicial forum. SC judgments say Magistrate's power cannot be taken away to re-order a probe or set aside an A Summary report (Closure report). Truth has a nasty habit of sneaking out. They say that since police has been directed to re-investigate they are doing so. It is a dangerous precedent to say that after a magistrate has accepted an A Summary, the Executive can order a re-investigation,” Arnab's counsel told the court.
Quoting the CJM's observations, he noted, “Then why is his custodial interrogation required? Is this not enough to release him on bond? Prima facie link between accused and suicide cannot be established. The judge should have released him on bond. That was not to be. Hence this plea before you (SC)."
Updated 00:20 IST, November 12th 2020