On 26th November, the Kerala High Court quashed criminal defamation proceedings against the media house Bharat Prakashan (Delhi) Limited, which was accused of defaming the banned terrorist outfit Popular Front of India (PFI). Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan stated in the judgment that, as PFI is a banned organisation under Indian law, it cannot file defamation complaints as it lacks legal entity status. The judgment holds importance as it strips banned entities of legal standing to claim reputational harm in the country.
Bharat Prakashan, founded by Pd. Deendayal Upadhyayis the publisher of magazines Organiser and Panchjanya. PFI had filed the defamation case over an article published in Organiser Weekly in September 2017, when the Islamist was not banned.
In a historic judgment, the #defamation cases against Bharat Prakashan, @eOrganiser and Editor-Reporters are quashed
— Organiser Weekly (@eOrganiser) December 1, 2024
"The Popular Front of India itself was banned by the Central Government for the reasons mentioned in the order of banning. In such circumstances… complaint of… pic.twitter.com/zHYvpKLt7U
Legal rationale for quashing the case
The court emphasised that, though PFI technically falls under the definition of a “person” in Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), it cannot invoke this section due to its banned status. The court observed: “When ‘the Popular Front of India’ itself is banned in India by the Central Government, such a banned association will not come within the purview of Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, because a banned association has no legal entity.”
The judgment referred to the Ministry of Home Affairs’ notification (S.O. 4559(E)) dated 27th September 2022, which declared PFI and its affiliates unlawful associations under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The Court further stated: “It cannot be said that there is defamation to a banned association because of certain publications by the petitioners.”
Allegations and complaint
The defamation case was filed by the general secretary of PFI, who claimed that Bharat Prakashan published an article linking the organisation to the banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). The article in question accused PFI of being involved in activities such as “Love Jihad,” recruitment of terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir, and the Bangalore serial blasts. The general secretary of PFI alleged that these accusations were defamatory in nature, leading to criminal proceedings under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC.
The report titled “Popular Front of India’ (PFI) titled – The Usual Suspect” published on 17 September 2017, had said that PFI is just a new avatar of banned SIMI. The article had pointed out various activities including involvement in love jihad cases to prove the allegation.
In response, PFI had filed a defamation case against Organiser publisher Bharat Prakashan, its MD Alok Kumar, Director and Publisher Bihari Lal Singh, Organiser Editor Prafulla Kethar, sub-editors Ganesh Kumar T and Nishant Kumar Azad. However, as PFI is a banned group now, the court dismissed the defamation case, ruling that banned entities can’t file defamation cases. The court also found no fault in the Organiser article, and noted that the union govt used similar arguments to ban PFI.
Court’s dismissal and further observations
Justice Kunhikrishnan noted that the allegations mentioned in the article were not only publicly available but also formed the basis of the government of India’s decision to ban PFI in 2022. The court said: “These are only some of the allegations against the Popular Front of India which were available in the public domain at that stage. Subsequently, the Popular Front of India itself was banned by the Central Government for the reasons mentioned in the order of banning.”
The court concluded that the complaint filed by the general secretary could not stand and quashed all further proceedings against the petitioners, including editors and reporters of Bharat Prakashan.
Significance of the ruling
Notably, the decision of the Kerala High Court not only provided significant relief to the media house but also set a precedent limiting the legal recourse available to banned organisations in India. It reinforced that entities declared unlawful cannot claim reputational harm. The court drew a clear boundary around the rights of such organisations, specifically in terms of defamation law. The judgment also underscored the importance of a free press in reporting allegations and matters of public concern.
Banned terror outfit Popular Front of India
In September 2022, the Government of India banned the Popular Front of India (PFI) and all the individuals associated with it for 5 years. There were credible reports that they were allegedly involved in rioting that happened in various parts of the country, particularly at Hindu festival Hanuman Jayanti and others. The Delhi Police in its charge sheet had also claimed to have found PFI’s link in the Delhi riots in 2020.
Further, this organisation and its office bearers are accused of hatching a conspiracy to make India an Islamic country by the year 2047, including taking funding and other support from abroad. Additionally, it was also alleged that many members of PFI were said to be influenced by the ideology of ISIS.
