Two News Channels from Andhra Pradesh Charged with Sedition, Move Apex Court Against FIR; Terms It As “Chilling Effect “On Media
(Judicial Quest News Network)
Two famous news channels from Andhra Pradesh TV5 and ABN news have moved the Supreme Court against the FIR registered against them by the Andhra Pradesh Police for sedition and other charges after they telecast “offending speeches “made by YSR Congress MP Kanumuri Raghurama Krishna Raju.
The plea, filed by Advocate Vipin Nair on behalf of TV5, says that news channel viz. TV5 is a premier news broadcasting service and telecasts hourly news bulletins and 30 special news bulletins, with the support of 294 special reporters in every constituency of the Telugu states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, and has its bureaus in Hyderabad, Vishakhapatnam and Vijayawada. TV5 has been of late tirelessly covering the facts related to the Pandemic. TV5 has without any prejudice, neutrally covered political issues in the States and has hosted influential public figures from all ends of the political spectrum.
It is further submitted that the only vague allegation in the FIR against TV5 is that some of the offending speeches of Mr. Raju were made on its channel. However, the FIR fails to identify such offending speeches, or the premediated and organised time slot when they were made.
The Petitioner is filing the present Writ Petition seeking quashing of the FIR No. 12/2021 (“impugned FIR”) registered by the CID PS, A.P., Amaravati, Mangalagiri under Sections 124A, 153A, 505 r/w 120B of the Indian Penal Code against inter alia the Petitioner’s news channel “TV5”. Further, the Petitioner also seeks quashing of the Enquiry Report dated 14.05.2021, which forms basis of the impugned FIR and a stay on any consequential investigation. In addition, the Petitioner seeks an order restraining the Respondents from taking any coercive action against the Petitioner Company, its news channels, or their employees.
The plea further states that The Petitioners verily believe that if this Hon’ble Court does not interject on an urgent basis, the Petitioner shall be meted out the same treatment.
The petitioners further submitted that Secondly, the impugned FIR seeks to criminalise the act of airing the views of a sitting Member of Parliament, who is a public figure, in a news channel; which is not only clearly violative of the Petitioner’s right to freedom of speech and expression and also creates a chilling effect for media houses in the state.
The plea moved by ABN News by AOR Guntur Pramod Kumar States that” Thirdly, since the YSRCP came to power in the State of
Andhra Pradesh, “ABN Andhrajyothi” news channel has been
targeted by the State Government and its broadcasting was stopped
at the ruling party/State Government’s behest, forcing it to
approach the Hon’ble TDSAT and despite the Order, the access to
the Petitioners’ channel is limited in Andhra Pradesh.”
It is further submitted that Fourthly, the registration of the present FIR, especially under the provision of sedition, violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and (g) of the Constitution of
India and is nothing but an attempt to browbeat the media and
prevent it from covering issues of public importance, thereby
depriving the public of the information about the happenings in the
State and the performance of the State Government.
The petitioner contended that That there is grave and imminent threat to the life and liberty of Petitioner No.1’s management and employees especially in light of the fact that Mr. Raghurama Krishnam Raju was
arrested without following the law in the prevailing Covid-19
situation, wherein complete and partial lockdowns have been
imposed in the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh
respectively.
Earlier today, Raju who was arrested by the Andhra Pradesh Crime Investigation Department (CID) on Friday on charges of sedition, had also moved Supreme Court against a May 15 order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court denying him bail.
Raju contended before Supreme Court that the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister is mis utilising the state police to frame his political opponents and keep them in jail so that they will not accuse him of being the person who had spent time in jail as an under trial.
The contention of the plea filed by the TV5 is the impugned FIR miserably fails to establish any nexus of TV5 to any of the alleged offences. The impugned FIR against TV5 is premised on the fact that there were premediated and organised slots given to Mr. Raju, which is not substantiated in the FIR and even otherwise cannot be termed as a criminal act as public figures are often hosted at designated time slots in news channels.
in pursuance of the impugned FIR, the Respondents have already initiated coercive action against Mr. Raju by arresting him and reportedly subjecting him to custodial torture. The Petitioners apprehend that the purpose of the mala fide FIR is to curb dissent in the State and cause a chilling effect on media houses.
