Narayan Rane to approach Bombay high court against FIRs, arrest – Times of India

MUMBAI: Union cabinet minister Narayan Rane, 69, arrested on Tuesday from Ratnagiri, is all set to approach the Bombay high court with a quashing petition against the various first information reports (FIRs) registered against him across the state and urgent relief to protect him from further arrests or any coercive steps.
His lawyer Aniket Nikam sought to file a plea for an urgent hearing on Tuesday, just prior to Rane’s arrest. But for technical reasons it could not be filed, he said.
There was no hearing before the high court on Tuesday as the petition was not filed. The high court said the petition has to be filed first.
On Wednesday, we will approach the high court for an urgent hearing, said advocate Rajendra Shirodkar, who is also appearing for Rane before the Mahad Magistrate’s court.
Before the high court he will be challenging the validity of the arrest and proceedings.
Nikam said the arrest is “illegal’’ as the mandatory procedure requiring a prior notice under section 41A of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) was not complied with.
The section requires a notice to be issued to a person for his or her appearance at the police station to give an explanation before any arrest and an arrest can be made only after citing and recording reasons.
Also, Nikam said, the alleged acts attributed to Rane require no custodial interrogation.
It was not immediately clear to Rane’s legal team whether an intimation of his arrest with reasons was sent to the Rajya Sabha chairperson as required, given his cabinet minister rank.
“There appears to be no basis or necessity for such an arrest,” said advocate Hitesh Jain, vice-president, BJP Mumbai Pradesh.
The Supreme Court had in a landmark 2014 judgment (Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar) held that it was mandatory to comply with section 41A CrpC for offences that attract up to seven years’ imprisonment and it casts a duty on a magistrate to not remand a person if the arrest is illegal. A recent order of the SC bench headed by CJI N V Ramana also said given the Covid-19 pandemic, arrests must follow the section 41A mandate.
“It is highly disputable what the cognizable offence is against him,’’ said advocate Satish Maneshinde who has appeared for Rane in the past in his case adding, “Where is the offence? He was answering a question posed to him and it was a hypothetical situation he spoke of regarding an alleged faux pas by the Chief Minister. Does it amount to an offence of communal disharmony under section 153 B or even an offence under section 505 (2) IPC for promoting any alleged ill-will. The arrest was unwarranted and the series of FIRs filed is something that the Supreme Court has already deprecated in the past in Arnab Goswami’s case.’’
Other lawyers, however, said once an FIR is registered the law will take its own course. Advocate Sudatta Patil said the comments made by Rane triggered the FIR but whether it merited an arrest is a different question. He added that police have registered an FIR finding that it discloses a serious, cognizable offence and the law will take its course now.
The FIRs against Rane were registered in Mahad, Nashik Cyber police station and Pune, also one in Thane on Tuesday, pursuant to a press conference he held on August 23. The FIR in Thane invoked section 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for defamation and section 505 (2) (promoting enmity or ill-will between classes) and 153 (b) (1) (c) (statements to promote disharmony or ill will). The maximum punishment is less than seven years’ imprisonment.
Legal experts point to section 196 of the Criminal procedure code (CrPC) which says that no court can take cognizance of offences under section 153 B except with the previous sanction of the Central Government or of the State Government.