The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice on a plea filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) challenging the Delhi High Court's decision to quash the money-laundering case filed against digital news portal NewsClick and its founder Prabir Purkayastha.
A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymlaya Bagchi and V Mohana has sought a response from NewsClick and Purkayastha to the ED's plea.
The ED's plea challenges a judgment passed by the Delhi High Court on May 29 by which it quashed criminal proceedings initiated over allegations of irregularities in foreign investments received by NewsClick.
By its ruling, the High Court had quashed the FIR registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in the matter, as well as consequential money laundering proceedings initiated by ED against NewsClick and Prabir Purkayastha.
The ED has now moved the Supreme Court challenging the quash of the PMLA case. Its counsel today told the Court that the Delhi Police is also in the process of filing a petition challenging the quashing of the EOW case.
The money laundering case against NewsClick and its founder stemmed from an investment received in 2018 from a US-based company M/s Worldwide Media Holdings LLC, which was allegedly non-existent.
In February 2021, the ED had raided the homes and offices of the NewsClick founder and employees. The raids lasted for more than four days whilst Purkayastha was detained at home.
Among the allegations made against NewsClick were overvaluing of shares, diverting funds and violation of foreign direct investment (FDI) regulations.
On May 29, the Delhi High Court ruled that the case amounted to an abuse of power against free and impartial journalism. The Court further observed that ED's allegation that a scheduled offence exists was "totally misconceived and baseless".
The High Court had further held that ED conducted a fishing and roving exercise on the news company.
While quashing the FIR registered by the EOW, the Court added that the continuation of such FIR was nothing but a gross abuse of the process of law.