DC Edit | Lower courts need to keep a better vigil on citizen’s rights

featured-image

The order of the Supreme Court holding the arrest and remand of founder editor of online portal Prabir Purkayastha “invalid in the eyes of law” and directing his release from jail not only restores his fundamental rights as a citizen but also exposes a ploy of the government at the Centre that it has been successfully employing to intimidate critics and incarcerate enemies. The court had, in a judgment in October, ruled that the investigating agency is bound to apprise a suspect upon his arrest of the grounds of his arrest as that is his only means to defend himself in a court of law. It insisted that its order in the Pankaj Bansal case, which underlined the right of a citizen guaranteed under Article 22(1) of the Constitution mandating that “no person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice”, held good in this case as well.

It rejected the argument of the Delhi police which carried out his arrest that the he was informed of the “reasons for arrest” and insisted that the “grounds of arrest” are specific to the case which alone can be of any help to the accused. It is to the credit of the court that it rejected the police’s argument that the order in the Pankaj Bansal case, which was delivered on October 3, does not cover Mr Purkayastha’s arrest a day later. It is unbecoming on .