Supreme Court Protects Co-Accused Journalist In Param Bir Singh Case From Arrest

A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh passed the order to not arrest, in view of the fact that Varghese had joined the investigation. However, it granted liberty to the State of Maharashtra to approach it in case he does not cooperate in future.

"...The Ld. Counsel for petitioner states that the petition has joined the investigation and his statement has been recorded. The Respondent State had objected to the grant of bail in view of the averments in the counter. We are of the view that there is no need for the petitioner to be arrested. The petitioner needs to cooperate...Liberty to Respondent- State in case the petitioner does not cooperate with the investigation."

In the case of extortion wherein Varghese is named along with Param Bir Singh, the Apex Court had already protected him from arrest vide order dated 11.01.2022 and asked him to cooperate with the investigation.

Senior Advocate, Mr. Siddharth Bhatnagar, appearing on behalf of Binu Varghese informed the Bench that he was initially named in an FIR along with Param Bir Singh. Later another FIR was registered against him on the complaint of extortion made by the Head of Revenue Department of Thane Municipal Corporation.

"This is against rejection of anticipatory bail. This petitioner was made accused in an FIR …where the then Police Commissioner of Mumbai (Param Bir) was accused 1, which matter has been transferred to CBI. My case is, I was dragged in in that FIR and now this FIR because I was close to a particular individual. Now, let me come to the particular FIR in question.The complainant is the Head of Revenue Department of Thane Municipal Corporation."

Reading from the FIR, Mr. Bhatnagar submitted that the allegation was with respect to demand of money by Varghese. He argued that from the facts it is clear that it is not a case of extortion, per se. Moreover, the complainant had conceded, while making allegations that he thought initially that the money was sought by Varghese as a loan. It was also pointed out that the complaint was only filed after the first FIR was registered against Varghese.

Mr. Bhatnagar further apprised the Bench that the co-accused had been granted anticipatory bail while Varghese's plea was rejected, primarily, on the basis of the WhatsApp messages.

"The other accused got anticipatory bail because there were no WhatsApp messages. The Court said there are WhatsApp messages against me so no. When your lordship gave protection I had gone down and cooperated with them."

Justice Kaul asked the Counsel for the State, Mr. Rahul Chitnis, "Has he joined the investigation?"

Mr. Chitnis responded, "Yes. After protection was granted by this Court, not before that."

Justice Kaul enquired, "Is your investigation complete?"

Mr. Chitnis responded in the affirmative. However, he requested the Bench to record in the order that he had filed a Counter Affidavit opposing the bail application. He stated -

"When this name (Param Bir Singh) comes up I don't want to take any chances."

Case Title: Binu Ninan Varghese v State of Maharashtra SLP (Crl) No. 9787 of 2021

Click Here To Read/Download Order