The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed petitions challenging the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1976 (UAPA) to be withdrawn at the request of petitioners.
The bench of Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Pankaj Mithal granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the concerned High Courts. It observed that the interim orders of protections given to some of the petitioners will stand vacated with the withdrawal of the petitions.
During the hearing, when a counsel representing some of the petitioners requested for extension of the interim orders while they approached the concerned High Court, the court dismissed the prayer. Earlier, while issuing notice in this batch of petitions, the apex court had passed interim directions for no coercive steps to be taken against some petitioners.
Meanwhile, Advocate on Record Prashant Bhushan, appearing for two advocates and a journalist booked by Tripura police under UAPA, contended that the only allegation against the two lawyers was that they had given a fact-finding report about the situation in Tripura, while the journalist had been roped in for tweeting, Tripura is burning.
Prashant Bhusan further explained that when the petitioners approached the Supreme Court, conditions were very bad in Tripura and they could not have gone to the state authorities apprehending arrest. He added that now the petitioners can withdraw the plea from before the top Court and approach the High Court. He prayed that interim protection granted to the petitioners earlier may be extended for 2 weeks, otherwise they may be arrested as soon as they go to Tripura.
To this, Justice Trivedi replied that they would not have entertained such petitions directly under Article 32, nor would have granted an interim order. Asking not to take any action for at least two weeks, Justice Trivedi said that the apex court is not passing any order.
Subsequently, Advocate Bhushan prayed that the Court may also allow petitioners to appear through video conferencing before the High Court, in case they are unable to go to Tripura for some reason.
Justice Trivedi responded that the court cannot micromanage everything. He added that the High Court must take a call on whether to allow the petitioners to appear through video or not. Consecutively, the petitions were dismissed as withdrawn.