New Delhi, Sept 2: The Delhi High Court has sought a response from the authorities on a petition filed by six Ukrainian nationals challenging the denial of permission to communicate with their family members through video conferencing while they remain in custody.
A bench headed by Justice Navin Chawla issued notice on the plea and listed the matter for further hearing on September 21.The petitioners have challenged a December 26, 2022 circular that, according to their plea, prevents foreign nationals lodged in jail from using the e-mulaqat facility to communicate with their relatives.
The accused have argued that the restriction violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. They have contended that maintaining contact with family is linked to a prisoner’s dignity, mental well-being and continued connection with society.
The six Ukrainians are among seven foreign nationals facing investigation by the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The group also includes an American citizen.According to the investigating agency, the accused had entered India on visas and subsequently travelled to Mizoram, including areas subject to restrictions on movement by foreign nationals.
The NIA has alleged that they later crossed into Myanmar and established contact with ethnic militant groups.The agency has further alleged that the accused received training in Myanmar and subsequently provided training to members of ethnic armed groups.
The allegations also include the supply of prohibited weapons, assistance in operating drones and the movement of a large number of drones from Europe.The NIA has registered a case against the accused under provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and other relevant laws.
The latest petition relates specifically to access to video communication with family members and is separate from the allegations in the underlying criminal case.
Recently, the High Court had rejected a challenge to a trial court order extending the period available for investigation in the case from 90 days to 180 days.
The court’s latest order to issue notice does not amount to a finding on the guilt or innocence of the petitioners. The allegations against them remain subject to investigation and the judicial process.
