Former Amnesty International India head Aakar Patel has been granted allowance by the Rouse Avenue Court, Delhi to leave the country for foreign travel. The Court has also directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to remove the Look Out Circular (LOC) sent to Aakar Patel concerning the case against Amnesty International India regarding the FCRA violations.
BREAKING: Delhi Court orders withdrawal of Look Out Circular against former Amnesty International India chair Aakar Patel in a Foreign Contribution Regulation Act case. Patel sought permission to travel to the US till May 30, 2022.@Aakar__Patel #Amnestyinternational #CBI #FCRA pic.twitter.com/bN7ZjxqFhc
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) April 7, 2022
It all started on April 6, when Patel was stopped at the Kempegowda Bengaluru International airport from boarding a flight to the USA. According to Patel, he was put on the ‘exit control’ list by the CBI and he received the passport back through a court order. In response to the look-out circular on him, Patel filed a plea at the Rouse Avenue Court, Delhi seeking directions to CBI for removal and withdrawal of the Look Out Circular against him and permission to travel to the US till May 30, 2022.
On Wednesday, the Delhi Rouse Avenue Court sought the response of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on the plea moved by Aakar Patel. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Pawan Kumar issued notice to the CBI on Patel’s application and sought a response from the Investigation officers (IO) for withdrawal of the Look Out Circular against Patel for he has to take up his assignments and lecture series in the US. Today the court was hearing the plea by Patel which was represented by Advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir.
Arguments by Aakar Patel’s lawyer
While the court was hearing both sides, Advocate Mir representing Patel questioned heavily the provision of opening the Look Out Circular (LOC) against the petitioner by the Investigation Officer of the CBI. The Look Out Circular is a legal letter used by authorities like Immigration officers to check whether a travelling person is wanted by the police. Mir countered that the notice against Aakar Patel is nothing but ‘rhetoric’. “It is nothing but a facade. Citizens’ rights can’t be railroaded like this. It is time that we send a suitable reply to the law enforcement agencies and society,” Mir said in Patel’s argument.
Mir said that the CBI’s logic behind issuing a LOC against Aakar Patel stating that him being an influential person and hence there was a chance of him fleeing from justice is totally unacceptable. Furthermore, Mir accused Investigation officer Bahuguna of violating court procedure, ethics, and morality. He asked the IO to pay Rs. 3.87 lakh from his personal account to Patel for the loss he incurred after being stooped from travelling to the US.
Mir: I would request that Mr Bahuguna (IO) pays Rs 3.87 lakh from his salary to my client.#AakarPatel #law #CBI
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) April 7, 2022
“Your honour the fundamental rights which are guaranteed under Article 19 and 21 are not to be trampled down, railroaded with a sense of impunity,” the lawyer argued.
Response by CBI officer
The Court asked the CBI officer about the necessity to open the LOC against Patel. The officer told the court that the letter was issued against the petitioner since he was an influential person and there was a chance of him fleeing from justice. The officer informed the court that the request for the opening of the LOC was sent to the Ministry of Home Affairs on December 31. When asked about the reason behind the LOC, the officer submitted to the court that the chargesheet was filed against Patel without arrest, in anticipation that him being an influential person could flee from justice an application was moved against him.
The Investigation officer notified the court that Aakar Patel did not comply with the notices sent to him when CBI asked him for some documents. The officer told the court that opening a LOC against Patel was a collective decision since ‘he is very well connected’. The Court later pondered that had the petitioner been a flight risk, he could have been arrested, or the CBI could have taken surety during the investigation. To this, the IO rebutted saying, “We don’t have to give detailed reasons. There is a performa we give,” notifying that there are no provisions before the CBI to give reasons before issuing a LOC.
CBI Counsel: That’s why LOC.
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) April 7, 2022
Court reserves order for 4pm today.#CBI #LOC #AakarPatel #Amnesty #Amnestyinternational
The Investigation officer further argued that since a total of Rs 26 crore is involved and the person is highly influential, a notice was sent to Aakar Patel.
ED case against Amnesty International
In February 2021, the ED attached movable properties of Amnesty International India worth Rs 17.66 crore in a money laundering case. During the investigations, ED had found that after the cancellation of the FCRA license by the Indian government, Amnesty International India Foundation Trust and other Amnesty entities adopted ‘new methods’ to receive money from abroad. Earlier, The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had registered an FIR against Amnesty International India Foundation Trust (AIIFT) and Amnesty International South Asia Foundation (AISAF) under sections of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) and the Indian Penal Code (120-B) for criminal conspiracy.
Delhi High Court had allowed donation fraud accused Rana Ayyub to travel abroad
Only 3 days ago, the Delhi High Court, Saturday (April 4, 2022) granted permission to the donation fraud accused journalist Rana Ayyub to travel abroad. The permission, however, came with a few pre-requisite conditions. As per the court order, Rana must disclose the details of travel, her contact and her place of stay.
The Delhi High Court was hearing Rana Ayyub’s plea seeking interim relief from the Enforcement Directorate’s action against her, stopping her from travelling abroad.
The Delhi HC specified that Rana Ayyub could travel to Italy provided she submitted an undertaking to return and deposit some money to show her bonafide. Rana’s counsel submitted that the journalist would return to India on April 11.
The court also stated that Ayyub has her old parents here in India and noted that the amount of alleged misappropriation is not ‘that big’, and is around just “10-12 crores”.
