Chair of the Amnesty International India board, Aakar Patel, on Friday, 8 April, filed a contempt application in a Delhi court against the Investigating Officer (IO) of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Himanshu Bahuguna and other other "errant" officers of the CBI for non-compliance of the court's order.
This comes a day after Patel was stopped at immigration from leaving the country for the second time, despite a court order asking the CBI to withdraw the Look Out Circular the agency had issued against him.
In the court on Friday, however, the when Patel's counsel Advocate Tanvir Ahmed Mir said that the CBI should say if they were filing the compliance or not, the CBI's counsel was quoted by media reports as saying:
"Nahi kar rahe nahi karenge. (Not doing it, won’t do it.) We have filed a revision."
Meanwhile, a special CBI judge, in CBI's revision plea, directed Aakar Patel not to leave the country without the court's prior permission and fixed the matter for further hearing on 12 April at 11 am.
The court also put a stay on Thursday's Delhi court order directed the CBI to file a compliance report by 4 pm on Friday and asking the CBI director to tender a written apology to Patel.
Thereafter, giving a chance to the CBI to file a reply, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Dharmender Singh is slated to continue hearing the contempt proceeding on 13 April at 2 pm.
What Was the Delhi Court's Original Order? And What Happened Later?
Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Court had on Thursday directed the CBI to withdraw the Look Out Circular issued against Patel, and to file a compliance report by Friday evening. The court had also noted that "apart from the monetary loss, the applicant had suffered mental harassment,” and asked the CBI to tender an apology.
However, hours later on Thursday, Patel said that he was stopped yet again by the immigration authorities at Bengaluru airport from boarding his flight to the United States of America (USA).
Taking to Twitter late on Thursday night, Patel said:
“Have been stopped at immigration again. CBI has not taken me off their Look Out Circular...Immigration at Bangalore airport says nobody at CBI answering their calls.”
“Will move court again tomorrow if I have to,” he added.
This is the second time in two days that Patel has been stopped by the immigration authorities.
After Patel was first stopped on Wednesday morning, and told that he could not go as the CBI had issued an LOC against him, he had filed a plea in a Delhi court challenging the LOC.
What Does the Contempt Plea Say?
Patel's counsel has sought appropriate orders from Delhi's Rouse Avenue Court and directions against the IO, as well as other "errant" CBI officers, “for not only committing the most egregious act of committing contempt of the order of the Hon’ble Court but also for diminishing the faith of a citizen of this country in rule of law, justice and fairness”.
Alleging "total disregard and wilful contempt of the order dated 7 April passed by this Hon’be Court," the application filed by Patel's counsel says: "The Hon’ble court had directed in the court that the IO is expected to extend full cooperation."
However, as per the application:
"On account of deliberate disobedience and disregard of the order dated 7 April by the Investigation Officer of the case, the applicant was not allowed to board his flight, and yet again the applicant became a victim of the illegal and egregious act of the Respondent agency in not complying with the Court order."
This, Patel's counsel claimed, was "despite (the CBI) having complete knowledge of the fact that the applicant (Patel) was travelling at night for lecture scheduled on 8 April at 11 am at University of Michigan, Ann Arbor."
Alleging that the IO had switched off his mobile phone, Patel’s counsel also claimed that the act “speaks volumes about the intention of the respondent agency in bulldozing the valuable fundamental rights of the applicant”.
“…by all means it can be safely submitted that the IO first violated the law of the land by illegally opening the LOC against the applicant and then later most cleverly decided to switch off his mobile phone with a clear intention and successful attempt to thwart and strangulate the valuable rights of the Petitioner by choosing to not comply with the order of the court.”Aakar Patel's application
Patel’s counsel also alleged that the CBI “has acted with a clear intention harass the applicant and suffocate his fundamental rights." They also pointed out that on account of the "deliberate disobedience" to the order passed by the court, the respondent had also put Patel to a further monetary loss of Rs 5,61,873.
Patel also asked the Court to pass an order directing the respondent to immediately inform the immigration on their official email regarding the withdrawal of the LOC against him, and to pass any other order that the court may deem it given the facts and circumstances of the case.
Background
Patel had confirmed to The Quint that he was travelling to the US to speak at University of California, Berkley (UC, Berkley); New York University (NYU); and University of Michigan, Anne Arbor. He was to deliver a talk on the attack on civil society at UC, Berkley; speak about his latest book at NYU; and participate in a social media interaction at University of Michigan, Anne Arbor.
The LOC against Aakar Patel was in connection with a case against Amnesty International, India, which pertains to alleged irregularities in foreign funding and a violation of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) in 2019.
(With inputs from LiveLaw.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)