SC allows...

The majority judgment said the police is free to go ahead with investigations and “it is not a case of arrest because of mere dissenting views expressed or difference in the political ideology of the named accused, but concerning their link with the members of the banned organisation and its activities”.

Rebutting the argument of the petitioners that there is no evidence against the five activists, Justice AM Khanwilkar, writing the judgment for himself and the Chief Justice, held that there is “no mala fide exercise of power the he police”.

Justice Khanwilkar in the judgment also held, “This is not the stage where the efficacy of the material or sufficiency thereof can be evaluated nor it is possible to enquire into whether the same is genuine or fabricated.”

The judges also refused to comment on the evidence collected by the police as it could prejudice the case.

“The option to proceed in the case with more arrests is open before us,” said Pune police commissioner K Venkatesham after the SC ruling. “Today’s judgment is the recognition of professional work done by the investigating team.”

Justice Chandrachud came down heavily on the police for holding media briefings in the case while the matter was in courts. He said, “In the present case, police briefings to the media have become a source of manipulating public opinion by besmirching the reputations of individuals involved in the process of investigation. What follows is unfortunately a trial by the media. That the police should lend themselves to this process is a matter of grave concern.”

Making a case for an independent probe , Justice Chandrachud highlighted the recent case of Nambi Narayanan, who was framed by Kerala police in the ISRO sying case. He said a CBI probe in the case exonerated Nambi Narayan and he was awarded him ₹50 lakh as compensation for wrongful prosecution.

The petitioners said their stand had been “vindicated” by the “dissenting verdict” delivered by Justice Chandrachud.

Addressing the media in New Delhi, historian Thapar said due to the top court’s judgment the liberty and dignity of the human rights activists had not been “jeopardised” for the time being, according to news agency IANS.

Supreme Court advocate Vrinda Grover, who represented the petitioners, said: “Justice Chandrachud has categorically held that liberty cannot be sacrificed at the altar of conjecture.”