SC to hold special Sunday sitting to hear journalist Vinod Dua’s plea seeking protection from arrest

A three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Uday Umesh Lalit will on Sunday hear a petition filed by senior journalist Vinod Dua seeking interim protection from arrest in connection with various FIRs registered against him in many states alleging that he had incited communal violence in the country, LiveLaw.in has reported.

The Delhi High Court had recently stayed the investigation against Vinod Dua in an FIR which alleges him of spreading misinformation and causing communal enmity on his YouTube show.

The Shimla police recently summoned him for questioning over a sedition charge levelled by a local BJP leader.

According to the complaint, he accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of using "deaths and terror attacks" to get votes. Dua has been asked to join the investigation at Kumarsain police station in Shimla district on Saturday, Rampur deputy superintendent of police Abhimanyu Verma said.

A Single Bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani at Delhi High Court, while holding that there's no prima facie case against Dua to warrant the registration of FIR, noted that there is no allegation that any adverse consequences, in terms of enmity, hatred or ill-will, much less any violence or breach of peace, occurred as a consequence of the webcast.

As per a report by The Wire, Dua said that early on Friday morning, the Himachal Pradesh police arrived at his house to serve him a hard copy of a notice asking him to appear before the Kumarsain police station by Saturday to answer charges filed against him, including that of sedition (section 124A of the IPC) for a news programme of his.

It was not immediately clear what complaint the new case is based on but the first case – now stayed – was registered after a member of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party moved the Delhi police last week.

"We came to know about this FIR last night. It was filed on June 6, while I was contacted last night by e-mail and today morning the Himachal Pradesh police landed at my place at 6:58 AM," Dua told PTI.

"I don't know whether they sought the permission of the Delhi Police or not as per law. They came to serve the notice. The distance between Kumarsain and Delhi is almost 14 to 16 hours, so they must have been in Delhi before that. It is a coordinated effort," he said.

"We have filed a petition in the Supreme Court," he added.

Dua has been charged under sections 124A (sedition), 268 (public nuisance), 501 (printing matter known to be defamatory) and 505 (statements conducive to public mischief) on the basis of a complaint last month by BJP’s Mahasu unit president Ajay Shyam.

On Thursday, Dua was sent a notice asking him to appear before police in Shimla. Himachal Pradesh policemen arrived at his Delhi home on Friday morning to serve the notice.

In his reply to the notice, Dua said he cannot visit Kumarsain police station because of his health, age and the COVID-19 protocol for travel and quarantine.

However, he has agreed to join the investigation through e-mail or any other online mechanism, Superintendent of Police Khushal Sharma said.

Dua said, "My concern is that the Supreme Court petition has been filed and if the hearing is tonight it’s fine, tomorrow morning is also fine. But if is does not happen by then, and I am not there (Kumarsain) by 10 AM tomorrow, can they take coercive action since their team is already here?"

BJP leader Ajay Shyam had complained that Dua made bizarre allegations on his 15-minute YouTube show on March 30.

According to his two-page complaint, Dua said Prime Minister Modi used deaths and terror attacks to garner votes.

The BJP leader said this was an act of instigating violence against the government and the prime minister by spreading false and malicious news.

On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court had stayed till June 23 an investigation into a similar case filed by a BJP spokesperson, Naveen Kumar. The court said there was an unexplained delay of nearly three months in filing the complaint. Dua’s petition to the court had claimed that the FIR lodged in Delhi was proof of "political vendetta" and an attempt to stifle free speech

(With Inputs from PTI)