The Supreme Court will on Wednesday take up a plea by Republic TV editor-in-chief Arnab Goswami challenging the Bombay High Court order denying him bail in an abetment to suicide case. The matter will be considered by a vacation bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and Indira Banerjee. The apex court is currently on Diwali recess. On November 9, the HC bench of Justices S S Shinde and M S Karnik had denied bail to Goswami. The court said that “no case was made out based on facts of case as per section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code under extraordinary jurisdiction” and said its observations are in ‘prima facie nature.’ The HC gave him liberty to move the sessions court for bail under Section 439 of CrPC and directed the sessions court to dispose of the matter in four days, if filed. Goswami and two others — Feroze Shaikh and Nitish Sarda — were arrested on November 4. The case against Goswami pertains to the death of interior designer Anvay Naik and his mother Kumud Naik at their bungalow in Alibaug in May 2018. According to police officials, the duo died by suicide over alleged non-payment of dues by Goswami’s channel and two other companies. Meanwhile, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Dushyant Dave on Tuesday protested the “urgent” listing of Goswami’s petition before the two-judge bench on Wednesday. In a letter to the secretary general of SC, he termed it “extraordinary”, accused the court’s pegistry of “selective listing of cases” and claimed that the likes of Goswami are getting “special treatment while ordinary Indians are made to suffer, including Imprisonment, which are many times illegal and unauthorised”. In his writ petition, Goswami said his arrest was conducted in “blatant violation of the fundamental rights to life and personal liberty” and his dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. In his bail application before the HC, Goswami also alleged that the police had manhandled him. The petition stated that “during the course of his arrest and while being transferred to Alibag in a police van and in the custody of the police, the petitioner suffered a 6-inch-deep gash on his left hand, a serious injury to his spinal cord, was hit by a heavy uniform police officer’s boot, was not allowed to wear shoes throughout, suffered vein injuries and was not even given access to drinking water.”
