The Supreme Court listed for urgent hearing on Friday a plea for bail by Kerala journalist, Siddique Kappan, who said he had spent two years behind bars on “trumped-up charges” merely due to his zest to discharge his professional duty to report on the “infamous case” of the alleged rape and murder of a Dalit girl at Hathras in Uttar Pradesh in 2020.
Appearing before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana on Wednesday, advocates Haris Beeran and Pallavi Prathap, for Mr. Kappan, orally mentioned the case for early listing.
“We deem appropriate to direct the Registry to list the matter on Friday, August 26, before an appropriate Bench,” the court ordered.
The journalist has appealed against an Allahabad High Court decision on August 2 to refuse him bail.
“As a result of the rejection of the application [by the High Court], the petitioner, a journalist of 12 years’ experience, who has also served as the secretary of the Delhi chapter of the Kerala Union of Working Journalists, continues to be incarcerated,” the petition said.
Mr. Kappan is booked under the draconian Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). He was picked up while en route to Hathras on October 5, 2020.
It said the High Court had “egregiously failed to discharge its bounden duty” under the UAPA to examine the entire material on record to decide whether or not a prima facie case had been made out against the accused.
The petition contended that the High Court failed to take note that the FIR/charge sheet ex facie did not make out a case under the provisions of the UAPA.
Besides, Mr. Kappan had been granted bail twice by the Supreme Court for visiting his ailing mother and for being treated for COVID-19. On both times, there had not been any allegations that he tried to jump bail or influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. It said the High Court had “glossed over” the fact that Mr. Kappan was an established journalist.
“Apart from a bald statement to the effect that a perusal of the chargesheet and documents adduced indicate that the offences have been committed, absolutely no reasons have been afforded to indicate as to how this conclusion has been arrived at,” the petition argued.
