NewsClick editor Prabir Purkayastha walked out of Tihar Jail on Wednesday night, hours after the Supreme Court said his arrest was illegal and ordered his immediate release.

The court specifically pointed out that a copy of the remand application was not provided to the appellant or his counsel before passing the remand order.

The terms of his bail, granted by the Patiala House court, include furnishing bail bonds worth Rs 1 lakh. Purkayastha is also not permitted to contact “witnesses and approvers” in the case, discuss the merits of the case, or travel abroad without the court’s permission.

But Purkayastha’s release is “much more than a technical outcome based on the failure of the Delhi police to furnish the grounds for his arrest in writing”, as The Hindu noted in its editorial today. Instead, it’s “also an indictment of the clandestine manner in which the police sought to obtain his custody”.

The editorial said the case against Purkayastha “seems fictional in its entirety” and lauded the Supreme Court for extending to the UAPA “the principle laid down in Pankaj Bansal (2023) that those arrested under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act should be given the grounds of their arrest in writing”. 

“Given the grave, even if far-fetched, nature of the allegations against him, regular bail would have been difficult to come by,” it said.

The Indian Express published an editorial too, headlined “A welcome message”. It also lauded the apex court for upholding constitutional protection offered to citizens under Article 22(1), given that “fundamental principles of jurisprudence” are “diluted” in cases under laws like the UAPA and PMLA.

The order, while not commenting on the charges against NewsClick, underlines the “perils of what has become in practice an alternate justice system, meant to deal with ‘heinous’ crimes”.

“NCRB data showed a 23 per cent rise in UAPA cases in 2022 compared to previous years, while the PMLA cases grew by 450 per cent in the first three years of the current government’s second term, compared to the same period in its first term. This context makes the SC’s order all the more welcome. It affirms once again the court’s role as the guardian of individual rights,” it said.

The Times of India also had an editorial on the SC order, calling it “the right call”.

“The purpose of ensuring that the details are communicated in writing is to allow the accused an opportunity to oppose remand and seek bail. In the absence of formal communication, the accused is at a disadvantage,” it said. “...When these details are not communicated formally to an accused prior to remand, there’s room for arbitrariness.”

It added: “It’s unfortunate that it took Purkayastha almost eight months to get his arrest declared illegal. The delay is a telling statement on lower judiciary.”

Newslaundry has consistently reported on the charges against Purkayastha and NewsClick. See a timeline of events here and the rest of our reportage here.