Aimed At Intimidating Independent Journalism: Rajasthan High Court Stays Coercive Action Against Arnab Goswami In FIR U/s. 153A IPC

The Rajasthan High Court while halting coercive action against Republic TV Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami has observed that continued investigation despite apparent lack of evidence is an attempt at suppression of journalistic freedom.

The Court was considering an application for stay filed by Arnab Goswami in his petition filed in 2022 challenging the FIR.

The single-judge bench of Justice Farjand Ali observed, "The continued investigation, despite the apparent lack of evidence, suggests an attempt to suppress journalistic freedom and subject the Petitioner to unwarranted legal proceedings."

The Petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani while the Respondent was represented by Deputy Government Advocate Vikram Rajpurohit.

Counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner who is an eminent journalist and Editor-in-Chief of the Republic Media Network, has been falsely implicated in the present FIR registered under Section 153A, which has been registered in pursuance of the news reporting conducted by Republic Bharat, a Hindi news channel under the Republic Media Network, regarding the demolition of a temple in Rajgarh, Rajasthan. It was specifically averred that the Petitioner is neither involved in the editorial decision-making of Republic Bharat nor has he participated in any capacity in the telecast, debate, or broadcast relating to the said news.

It was further contended that the registration of the FIR is a manifest abuse of the legal process, driven by extraneous considerations and political vendetta. The selective initiation of criminal proceedings against the Petitioner while similar reports were aired by various media houses raises a serious question about the impartiality of the investigation and its underlying motive and it appears that the registration of the FIR is aimed at intimidating and silencing independent journalism, which is a fundamental pillar of democracy.

"It appears that the registration of the FIR is aimed at intimidating and silencing independent journalism, which is a fundamental pillar of democracy", the Court observed. 

The Court at the outset noted that prima facie it appears that the allegations against the Petitioner lack substantive material connecting him to the alleged offences. 

"The FIR does not annex any transcripts, video clippings, or substantial evidence to demonstrate that the Petitioner, in his personal capacity, has made statements or engaged in acts that could invoke the provisions of Section 153A of the IPC. The absence of such material renders the allegations speculative and unsubstantiated," the Court observed.

It was of the view that the essential ingredients of Section 153A are not satisfied in the present case as the FIR neither specifies the exact statements nor provides any documentary or electronic evidence to show that the Petitioner has engaged in speech or conduct that incites enmity or disharmony. The Court stressed that the lack of specificity in the allegations raises serious doubts about the bona fides of the prosecution’s case.

"Moreover, it is well settled in law that the invocation of Section 153A requires a direct and deliberate act of promoting enmity or hatred. For an offence under Section 153A to be constituted, the alleged words or acts must be clearly intentional, targeted, and capable of inciting disorder or violence. Mere reporting of an event of public interest, devoid of inflammatory intent or impact, cannot be construed as an offence under Section 153A," the Court said.

The Court found weight in the contentions of the Counsel for the Petitioner.

The Application was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: Arnab Goswami vs. State Of Rajasthan

Appearances:

Petitioner- Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, Advocate Muktesh Maheshwari, Advocate Vandana Bhansali

Respondent- Deputy Government Advocate Vikram Rajpurohit

Click here to read/download Order