Fund embezzlement: SC extends Teesta’s protection from arrest

The Supreme Court on Tuesday extended the interim protection from arrest granted to social activist Teesta Setalvad in a case of alleged embezzlement of funds for a museum at Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society that was devastated in the 2002 riots till January 31. 

“Interim relief to continue till January 31,” a three-judge Bench, headed by Justice AR Dave said. Meanwhile, the Bench issued notice to CBI on a fresh plea filed by Setalvad in connection with a separate case relating to alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA).

The plea alleged that the High Court, which had granted anticipatory bail to Setalvad and her husband Javed Anand, erroneously remarked that there was “prima facie” violation of FCRA by them.

While granting anticipatory bail to Setalvad, the High Court had said, “Prima facie this court holds that there has been violation under the FCRA. But where is the threat to national security and public interest? You (CBI) have to show the court this.” 

The Bench then fixed the batch of pleas, filed by Gujarat police, CBI and Setalwad, for hearing on January 21.

Setalvad and her husband are facing a case registered by the Gujarat police relating to alleged embezzlement of funds collected by them for constructing a museum at Ahmedabad’s Gulbarg Society which was ravaged in the 2002 communal riots. The SC had granted them protection in this matter.

Another case has been registered by the CBI alleging that the Sabrang Communications and Publishing Pvt Ltd, run by Setalvad, received foreign grants from the Ford Foundation in violation of FCRA provisions, in which the Bombay high court has granted anticipatory bail to the couple. 

The CBI, Gujarat police and Setalvad have filed separate petitions in the Apex Court in these two matters.

The CBI has contested the August 11 order of the Bombay high court granting anticipatory bail to Setalvad and her husband in the FCRA violation case, claiming the court had erred in giving relief after holding “prima facie” that they had violated the law.

While the couple has denied all charges, the agency said after ‘prima facie’ holding that there was misuse of funds they had received from Ford Foundation for which they were “undoubtedly answerable”, the high court ought not have granted anticipatory bail using its extraordinary discretionary powers.