HALVI.K.S Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Public Interest Litigation is filed by an Advocate, seeking to protect, the interest of the community of lawyers, and violation of the fundamental rights of the public at large regarding their rights to be kept informed about the current social, political, economic, cultural and other topics and important issues, to enable them to understand and form an opinion, how they are managed by Government and administration including but not limited to the important judicial pronouncements. Basically, petitioner wants a guideline to be formed by this court to regulate the activities of the print and electronic media.

(2.) According to the petitioner, honest and truthful representation of the events from time to time is envisaged in the scheme of the Constitution of India. In a democratic set up, citizens must be able to form their own opinion, comments and view points on such matters and events that affect their future. The right to freedom of speech and expression contained in Article 19 of the Constitution of India is not absolute as it is bound by sub-clause (2). According to the petitioner, deliberate planting of lies, repeated broadcast of news to malign the image of judiciary, government functionaries, police force, political leaders including but not limited to Prime Minister, Chief Minister and other Ministers at the will, whims and fancies without personally verifying the correctness or source in violation of broadcasting ethics exceed the scheme of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, thus creating hindrances in discharging duties of functionaries at the critical positions. It is also stated that the present acts of the media violates the principle of consideration of innocence until proved guilty and the media according to their political or other socio-economic affiliation proclaim people as guilty to generate negative opinion on people of their target in violation of fundamental rights of the targeted victims. It is submitted that such conduct on the part of the media not only creates unrest in the community, but also affects the credibility of the news broadcasted to put the public at large in a great dilemma as to what to believe and what not. Thus, according to the petitioner, the news and opinions published by the media houses infringe the fundamental rights of the citizens to know the truth and allow some unscrupulous people to indulge in cyber bullying on social media platform with the support of the unauthenticated opinions published by the media houses and cause irreparable damage to the dignity and credibility of certain personnel. Moreover, most of the media houses are engaged in spreading news of their interest to disintegrate community by creating political and communal polarisation in the society. It is submitted that due to such conduct on the part of the media houses, the right to privacy which is a fundamental right protecting the inner sphere of the individual from interference of both the State and non-State actors and the freedom of the individuals to make autonomous choices in life are materially affected. That apart, it is submitted that the media houses are proclaiming the names of the persons not even named in the FIR, and stories are being planted to create suspicion in the minds of the public at large. Therefore, such an act would amount to contempt of court, since the news might prejudice the judiciary. The sum and substance of the contention advanced by the petitioner is that the legitimacy of such publication is questionable as criminals are not punished according to their political affiliation or religion or caste and making false and baseless allegations against the elected functionaries, Chief Minister, Ministers or Prime Minister would amount to contempt and legitimacy of such unfounded allegations are doubtful. It is also stated that there is no rational connection between allegations and the report published. Reputation, being a fundamental right, the State must protect the same from unscrupulous media houses. The victim cannot be expected to chase down and clear his name after a long battle once his reputation is maligned as most of the individuals would not have resources to fights it out, contents the petitioner. However, it is submitted that the law cannot permit infringement of fundamental rights at will, only because a victim is not coming forward to file a complaint and therefore, it is necessary that appropriate guidelines are formed and ensure the media houses to follow such guidelines in the interest of the pubic at large. Various examples are cited by the petitioner which created repercussions and adverse consequences in the trial of various political, social, sensitive, and controversial cases, and based on such aspects, it is submitted that unless the media plays focussed role in the interest of the nation as a whole, it will damage the justice delivery system of the country destroying trust reposed in the judiciary by the common man in a systematic manner. Therefore, unless necessary interventions are made, one of the important pillars of the democracy can crumble at the hands of some unscrupulous media personnel engaged in the guise of journalism. Therefore, prima facie, there is failure of the sovereign to ensure the protection of fundamental rights of general public and the rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India r/w the Indian Penal Code and the Contempt of Courts Act , and so also various guidelines and judgements enunciated by the Apex Court.

(3.) With the above background facts, certain specific instances are pointed out by the petitioner to substantiate the contention put forth in the writ petition, that, it was reported on 5 th July, 2020, the customs officials at Thiruvananthapuram Airport seized gold weighing 30 kg. from diplomatic cargo addressed to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Consulate in Kerala and the officials caught one Mr. Sarith Nair, a former Public Relations Officer at the Consulate using a fake ID to collect the baggage with the smuggled gold trying to pass himself of as someone who could enjoy diplomatic immunity with respect to the cargo. It is assertively stated that diplomatic cargo normally cannot be checked by customs officials. But, the customs officials had received sanction from the Government to examine the baggage, which was a news revealed by the Customs Commissioner to the Press. It is the case of the petitioner that the Customs officials were tipped off, that gold might be hidden in the cargo and suspect that there is a well organised syndicate behind the smuggling racket. At the time of interrogation by the customs officials, according to the petitioner, the aforesaid Sarith Nair is reported to have said that he was friendly with one Ms. Swapna Suresh, that she was involved in the gold smuggling operations, and according to the petitioner, the Customs officials say that it is Swapna Suresh who forged the documents and would allow them to claim diplomatic immunity over the cargo. It is also pointed out that the said lady is involved in a forgery case against an Air India employee. However, the Press sensationalised these news items and stories that came to be published through print, electronic and social media suggesting various suspicions like, the accused lady is in fact, daughter in law of another prominent Congress leader, Kerala Chief Minister directly or indirectly involved, a Central Minister might have helped the accused to reach Bangalore, various video and photographs were published to connect several Government officials and prominent politicians and MPs including but not limited. It was also reported that although the National Investigation Agency reportedly stated that they have strong suspicion that gold smuggling is linked with international terror funding. There is the possibility of an attempt to endanger the life of the accused. The reporters also went on to put live telecast of the journey of the accused giving details of the path, many passengers and escort vehicles. Therefore, according to the petitioner, such type of reporting even if to help anyone, it would be the potential criminals and urges one to think as to what should be the extreme limit of reporting by the media. It is also stated that the media reported that Mr. M. Sivasankar, the former IT Secretary of the State Government who has been removed, from his post as Chief Minister's Principal Secretary, is the connection between Swapna Suresh and the Kerala Government and the said Mr Sivasankar appointed Swpna Suresh as Operations Manager at the Space Park after she left the UAE Consulate. Various other aspects are also pointed out in the writ petition in respect of the news published by the media houses connecting the Ministers of the State Government and others. Therefore, the paramount contention advanced by the petitioner is that it is crystal clear that the publishers are misusing the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under the Constitution of India for political mileage, and trying to use images and words to create apprehension in the minds of the viewers about their political leaders or government servants. Such maligned publications are rampant even in other cases where the accused is remotely affiliated with any political parties or celebrity. Other instances are also pointed out by the petitioner in respect of an investigation conducted in respect of a child abuse and it is contended that the media houses fabricate news to ensure that the accused are maligned brutally, and get them punished on the basis of the news published irresponsibly.