Despite the court granting 60 more days on December 22 last year, Delhi Police filed an application seeking a month’s more time to complete the investigation.
However, the Patiala House Court granted 20 days, and also extended the judicial custody of Purkayastha and Chakravarty till March 15.
Last year, a police application had sought an extension for the maximum period allowed under the law, which is 180 days from the day of the accused’s arrest in cases filed under special acts, including the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The application had stressed on the voluminous nature of documents and evidence in the case, stating that the agency needs to visit various locations outside Delhi, contributing to the expected delay.
On January 9, the court had also granted permission to Chakravarty to become an approver in the case after he had filed an application seeking pardon.
Chakravarty claimed to possess material information which he is willing to disclose to the Delhi Police.
Meanwhile, the Delhi High Court last week issued a notice to Delhi Police on a plea filed by Purkayastha challenging the FIR in the case.
During the proceedings, advocate Zoheb Hossain, representing the police, had opposed the issuance of the notice, citing subsequent developments in the case, notably the involvement of Chakravarty as an approver.
Hossain had argued that the alleged offences were prima facie established against the accused. Senior advocate Dayan Krishnan, representing Purkayastha, had contested these claims, prompting Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma to issue a notice to consider Delhi Police’s response.
On October 13, 2023, Purkayastha and Chakravarty’s petitions challenging their arrest and remand were rejected by the high court.
The Special Cell of Delhi Police had registered an FIR in connection with the case on August 17, 2023 under different sections of the UAPA and the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against NewsClick.
Earlier in the same month, a New York Times investigation had accused NewsClick of being an organisation funded by a network linked to US millionaire Neville Roy Singham to allegedly promote Chinese propaganda.
IANS
