Rup kumar, Bihar
Journalists can’t be arrested just for criticising govt: Supreme Court
In the latest of a series of pro-free speech and media freedom orders, the Supreme Court on ruled no journalist could be arrested on sedition charges merely for harshly criticising the government or the establishment, if the scribe did not incite violence against the government or hatred between communities. Quashing a year-old sedition FIR registered by Himachal police against journalist Vinod Dua for his social media video criticising the government and hitting out at PM Modi for the miseries of migrant labourers in the wake of last year’s lockdown, Justices U U Lalit and Vineet Saran said going by the allegations in the FIR and after perusing the content of Dua’s video, ingredients of the offences of sedition or defamation were not made out. The SC also warded off the threat of invoking the Disaster Management Act against Dua. SC: Dua’s views don’t constitute any offence The SC said the views expressed by Vinod Dua did not constitute any offence under the Disaster Management Act or any provision of the IPC. But the court refused to equate journalists with doctors in whose favour the apex court had ruled that a medical practitioner facing charge of negligence should not be arrested without a preliminary inquiry. The court rejected Dua’s plea, made by senior advocate Vikas Singh, for a direction to the Centre and states to set up a committee to examine the charges levelled in an FIR against any journalist with 10 years’ experience. Dua had pleaded a journalist should be arrested only when the committee was satisfied that the charges required arrest. In recent years, journalists have often come under attack in different parts of the country. In many cases, spurious charges have been slapped on them. Given this backdrop, the Supreme Court’s judgment is most welcome. It’s notable that the apex court did not lay down any new rules. Rather, it reminded the police about a landmark case that happened 60 years ago. The sad truth is that authorities have to be repeatedly told about well-established democratic norms these days. Writing the 117-page judgment, Justice Lalit extensively referred to the 60-year-old, five-judge constitution bench judgment in Kedar Nath Singh case, in which the apex court had laid down the definition of what constituted the offence of sedition and had ruled that a citizen’s right to criticism, however harsh, could never be a ground to prompt police to lodge an FIR under Section 124A of IPC (sedition). POPULAR FROM INDIA TOI finds ‘The Seeker’ who made the world rethink Covid’s origins Dismayed at Twitter’s response to 2 notices we sent: IT ministry Study claims Covid-19 not natural, but result of Wuhan lab-leak 17.2 crore have got at least one jab, more than US’s 16.9 crore: Government VIEW MORE “The principles culled out from the decision in Kedar Nath Singh show a citizen has a right to criticise or comment upon the measures undertaken by the government and its functionaries, so long as he does not incite people to violence against the government established by law or with the intention of creating public disorder; and that it is only when the words or expressions have pernicious tendency or intention of creating public disorder or disturbance of law and order that Sections 124A and 505 of the IPC must step in,” the bench said. “Every journalist will be entitled to protection in terms of Kedar Nath Singh, as every prosecution under Sections 124A and 505 of the IPC must be in strict conformity with the scope and ambit of said sections as explained in, and completely in tune with, the law laid down in Kedar Nath Singh,” it added.
LAW IS SUPREME 