Court rejects request for Arnab Goswami’s police custody

Republic TV chief Arnab Goswami remanded in judicial custody

November 05, 2020 06:18 pm | Updated 11:05 pm IST - Mumbai

Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Parishad (ABVP) members raise slogans against Maharashtra government protesting the arrest Arnab Goswami, in New Delhi on November 5, 2020.

Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Parishad (ABVP) members raise slogans against Maharashtra government protesting the arrest Arnab Goswami, in New Delhi on November 5, 2020.

The Magistrate Court in Alibag, Maharashtra, recorded reasons for rejecting the request for police custody for Republic TV chief Arnab Goswami on Wednesday. The court remanded him in judicial custody for 14 days.

Also read: Arnab’s arrest the beginning of the end of Maharashtra govt: Union Minister

Mr. Goswami was arrested on November 4 from his residence in Mumbai for allegedly abetting the suicide of interior designer Anvay Naik and his mother Kumud Naik, directors of Concorde Designs Private Limited, for not paying ₹83 lakhs towards the Bombay Dyeing Studio Project.

In court, the prosecution argued that Mr. Goswami tried to evade arrest and had not been co-operating. The prosecutor said custody was required for questioning on some documents seized from him.

Senior advocate Aabad Ponda, representing Mr. Goswami, appeared through videoconferencing and told the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) that no summons or notice was issued and after a summary report was submitted, arresting his client was illegal as Mr. Goswami was willing to pay the money.

Also read: Arnab Goswami arrest triggers verbal clash between BJP, Sena

5-hour hearing

After perusing the documents and hearing the arguments for over five hours, CJM Sunaina Pingle said the victim’s death was not clearly connected with the accused. No court order was issued for such an investigation. The prosecution had not shown or informed the defect in the earlier investigation, hence police custody could not be granted, said the court.

The order said, “The investigating officer on October 15, 2020 only submitted a report to the magistrate informing that certain fresh material has come to the fore in the case. There is no record to show that the magistrate permitted reopening of the case.”

Also read: Law will take its own course, says Congress

The 11-page-order also states, “All reasons seeking custody are primarily collection of documentary evidence hence custody of the accused is not necessary”.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.