Agartala: The Tripura high court has quashed the lookout circular which was issued by the Tripura Police against one Soumen Sarkar, an NRI hailing from Tripura running a news portal Tripura Infoway.com from the US.
Speaking with the reporter, the counsel Amitabha Roy Barman said that earlier in January last year, the BJP-led Tripura government has issued a look out circular against Soumen Sarkar for publishing a series of news on Tripura chief minister Biplab Kumar Deb.
The court on March 12 had given its final order.
“Various fake, politically motivated cases were lodged against Soumen Sarkar, editor of TripuraInfoway.com, his old-aged parents were harassed multiple times, photographers, journalists, office bearers were threatened, thrashed. During the left front government, and now during the BJP government, many cases were filed against him,” the counsel said.
Sarkar’s counsel said that using police force, the government wanted to close Tripurainfoway.com based on false and fabricated complaints.
The copy of the Tripura high court order which is available with The Wire reads that Soumen Sarkar, who is the petitioner, is a non-resident Indian and he has been hosting a news portal named and styled as Tripura Infoway.com which is registered in the US. The petitioner also holds the position of editor of the said news portal.
“The news portal has become the target, according to the petitioner, for fearlessly exposing the cause of common people. The parents of the petitioner are residing permanently in Tripura. His father is an octogenarian whereas his mother is a septuagenarian. They have become subjected to harassment by the police,” the judgment and copy of the order by Justice Subhasish Talapatra reads.
The order copy reads that Gautam Das, a leader of the then ruling party CPI(M) at the relevant point of time filed a complaint against the petitioner for streaming a news item on October 22 of 2017 on his portal. Accordingly, cognisance was taken under Section 500 of the IPC by the order dated December 07 of 2017 in C.R.373/2017 by the chief judicial magistrate, West Tripura.
Another complaint (CR01 of 2018) was launched by Saheed Choudhury, the then minister of the department of youth affairs and sports, Government of Tripura, alleging defamation, and cognisance was taken by the sessions judge on April 5, 2018, under Section 500 of the IPC.
“Again, another complaint was lodged by Biplab Kumar Deb, chief minister of Tripura through the public prosecutor, district – West Tripura taking aid of section 199(2) of the CrPC,” the copy of the court’s order reads.
It said that the petitioner Soumen Sarkar has asserted that all these criminal cases have been filed by different persons in power for ‘silencing’ his news portal for exposing the truth in the interest of the common people.
“To grind further, there had been request from the superintendent of police that the petitioner’s passport and visa be cancelled. The petitioner was searched in his parents residence on perception or information that he was staying there. Thereafter, look out circular has been issued against the petitioner. The police has become extremely aggressive and they had started showing their muscle in order to harass the family of the petitioner.”
Justice Subhasish Talapatra said in his judgment that in the present case, no warrant of arrest issued by any court against the petitioner is pending and the petitioner is being represented by his engaged counsel. The notice under Section 41A of the CrPC was issued at a time when it was physically impossible for the petitioner to travel to India owing to the COVID-19 lockdown.
“Hence, his inability to appear before the police cannot be termed as deliberate. So far the question of impounding of the passport is concerned, no case has been made out by the respondents No.1 and 2 (Tripura government, director general of police and superintendent of police, West Tripura district) in terms of Section 10(3) of the Passport Act. That apart, Passport Act does not authorise the Indian Passport Authority to cancel US Passport,” Justice Talaptra said in his judgment.
The single bench justice also observed that as claimed by the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3, the case of the petitioner falls under Section 10(3) (e) of the Passport Act cannot be sustained in as much as the circumstance as stated in clause-(e) is that in respect of commission of the offence in as much as the authority cannot be extended unless the travel document including a passport had been withheld by the criminal court in India or the holder of the passport has committed any offence.
“It is apparent that the passport authority has refused to act in accordance with the request made by the respondents No.1, 2 and 3. This court cannot shut its eyes to the right of the petitioner. The action which curtails or takes away the personnel liberty has to be reasonable and proportionate and has to be considered not in the abstract or hypothetical considerations,” the order of the Tripura high court said.
“Having regard to all these aspects as recorded above, the lookout circulars, as issued against the petitioner, stands quashed,” Justice Talapatra order.
He also said that as there is no contemplation of impounding of the passport by way of overstepping the authority, it is directed that without the order of the competent criminal court, the investigating agency shall not venture for taking action for impounding the passport of the petitioner as coercive measure.
“It is further directed that on arrival at Agartala, the petitioner shall give information to the investigating agency and respond to the summons issued by the criminal courts or comply the order of the courts. It is made absolutely clear that the observations as made above reflect in no manner on the merit of the investigation, but the investigations should be brought to its end without delay. In terms of the above, the writ petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs,” Justice Talapatra said in his order.