Making a True Report Regarding Affairs Which are in Public Domain is a Right, Media Can Report on Firs, Arrest of Persons: Bombay High Court

(Judicial Quest News Network)

The Bombay High Court has recently delivered a judgement that media has the right to report on registration of first information reports (FIR) and on cases filed in courts and defamation action cannot lie on the basis of such reports.

It is common knowledge that in daily newspapers at least some space is devoted to the news about the registration of crimes, filing of cases in Courts, the progress of the investigation, arrest of persons, etc. It constitutes news events which public has the right to know.

Justice Vinay Joshi While explaining the freedom of press and the importance of the freedom of press said that it is the primary function of the Press to provide comprehensive and correct information, especially when it is brought into the public domain. Freedom of the Press is implied from the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. In other words, the freedom of making a true report regarding the affairs which are in the public domain is a right, which flows from the freedom of speech. The action of defamation about true and faithful reporting is unhealthy for a democratic setup.

It is common knowledge that in daily newspapers at least some space is devoted to the news about the registration of crimes, filing of cases in Courts, the progress of the investigation, arrest of persons, etc. It constitutes news events which public has the right to know. Certainly, the Publishers are to report the true happenings in their newspapers. I may reiterate that there is no dispute that the fact of registration of crime was correctly reported. 15 Filing complaints about defamation on such news items are nothing but an attempt to shut up and stifle the Reporters /informants and to force them to withdraw the report filed against the persons who are allegedly defamed.

The court is of the view that accurate reportage on registration of cases as defamatory would amount to restricting reporting on investigations only the final outcome depriving the right of the public to know the happenings.

The court has further emphasised in its order that the primary function of the press is to provide correct information and allowing defamation cases against media for publishing true reports, would be unhealthy in a democratic setup.

In other words, the freedom of making a true report regarding the affairs which are in the public domain is a right, which flows from the freedom of speech. The action of defamation about true and faithful reporting is unhealthy for a democratic setup.

The court has further said that Filing complaints about defamation on such news items are nothing but an attempt to shut up and stifle the Reporters /informants and to force them to withdraw the report filed against the persons who are allegedly defamed. No reply in this respect was forthcoming from the Counsel of the non-applicant nor has anything in this respect been stated as to how the said act of Editor/Publisher gives rise to the action for libel. If it was held so then no reporting of news could be made till the final outcome of the investigation or the final orders of the last Court. It would deprive the rights of the public to know the happenings

It is highlighted that  the Press has great power in impressing the minds of the people and thus it is essential that the person responsible for publishing anything in newspapers should take good care before its publication. No doubt, publication of news on rumour or on hear-say information having no iota of truth is fatal to a Journalist. Herein it is not the case that First Information Report was not at all registered or the distorted news item was published.

The petition was filed by Vijay Darda, Chairman and Rajendra Darda, Editor-in-Chief of Lokmat Media Pvt Limited (Applicants) who sought quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against them by a magistrate court on a defamation complaint.

It pertains to the registration of crime against the complaint and his family members which the complaint alleged was false and defamatory as the publishers had not verified facts before publishing the news.

The court has held that the responsibility of the Editor is to publish true facts and nothing else. The complaint of defamation alleges that the truthfulness of the contents of the First Information Report are not verified. The publisher is not expected to investigate the matter and ascertain the truthfulness of the First Information Report before publishing the news item. The liability and responsibility of the Editor are restricted to a limited extent therefore; the contention in that regard is not acceptable.

Advocate Firdouse Mirza and Nitin Lambat appeared for applicants and complainant respectively.