Meanwhile, on Friday, even the CBI moved a revised petition in the Rouse Avenue Court for an urgent stay on the court order that revoked the look out notice, according to sources.
New Delhi: Journalist and human rights activist Aakar Patel Friday moved a Delhi court against a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) officer for contempt of a court order that had quashed a look out notice issued against him. Meanwhile, on Friday, even the CBI moved a revised petition in the Rouse Avenue Court for an urgent stay on the court order that revoked the look out notice, according to sources.
A day before, on Thursday, Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Pawan Kumar had granted relief to Patel who was stopped from boarding a flight to the United States at the Bangalore Airport on Wednesday. The court had also asked the CBI director to issue a written apology to “heal his wounds” and “uphold the public trust in the agency”. However, despite the court order, Patel was stopped from flying even in the evening.
Patel took to social media and said he was stopped again by immigration officials at the Bengaluru airport. He said the look out circular against him had not been withdrawn by the CBI.
Patel’s application to the court said that the Investigating Officer, Himanshu Bahuguna, was present in the court and advocate Tanveer Ahmed Mir, who appeared on behalf of Patel, had apprised Bahuguna that Patel seeks to take a 12.30 am flight for a lecture at the University of Michigan. The application further said that the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had verbally told the CBI to extend full cooperation.
In the application, Patel said despite the order, Bahuguna switched off his mobile phone instead of being available for the compliance of the order. This, the applicant said, “speaks volumes about the respondent agency in bulldozing the valuable fundamental rights of the applicant”.
“The conduct of the respondent agency indicates that the premier investigating agency of the country does not believe in rule of law and rather seeks to vent harassment and undue persecution of the applicant instead of a fair prosecution,” the plea stated.
