Journalist Arnab Goswami was granted relief by the Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court in a significant decision on 3rd March, which stayed all coercive steps against him in a formal complaint filed under Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case concerned a news report that was broadcast on Republic Bharat, a Hindi news channel that is part of the Republic Media Network, about the destruction of a temple in Rajgarh and a demolition drive in Alwar, Rajasthan.
A complaint by Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera objecting to the news led to the registration of a first information report (FIR) against Goswami at the Ambamata Police Station in Udaipur on 17th May 2022. The Congress Party was in power in Rajasthan at that time under the leadership of Ashok Gehlot. Days later on 20 May 2022, Arnab Goswami was granted interim relief by the Rajasthan High Court.
The judgment was issued by a single judge bench based on the preliminary conclusion that the case lacked the aspects of the violation under Section 153A, which penalizes the incitement of animosity between various religious communities. The court emphasized that the section does not consider “mere reporting of an event of public interest, devoid of inflammatory intent or impact” to be an offense.
“Upon perusal of the contents of the FIR, it prima facie appears that the allegations against the petitioner lack substantive material connecting him to the alleged offences. The FIR does not annex any transcripts, video clippings, or substantial evidence to demonstrate that the petitioner, in his personal capacity, has made statements or engaged in acts that could invoke the provisions of Section 153A of the IPC. The absence of such material renders the allegations speculative and unsubstantiated,” the court pointed out.
According to Justice Farnjand Ali, the temporary injunction would remain in effect until Goswami’s plea contesting the criminal case’s registration is resolved. He further mentioned that even if the accusations in the FIR are believed at face value, they do not reveal the commission of a crime under the section.
The court expressed that the persistent criminal inquiry in this case appears to be an attempt to stifle journalistic freedom by exposing Goswami to unnecessary legal procedure. “The continued investigation, despite the apparent lack of evidence, suggests an attempt to suppress journalistic freedom and subject the petitioner to unwarranted legal proceedings,” it pronounced.
As a result, the court halted any coercive measures against Goswami in this case. “Accordingly, the present Stay Application is allowed. It is directed that till the disposal of the main petition, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with FIR No. 276/2022 of Police Station Ambamata, Udaipur.”
The court read the clause and stated that in order for an offense to be confirmed, it must be proven that the accused either: Promoted or attempted to promote enmity, hatred, or ill-will between various communities through words (spoken or written), signs, or visible representation or performed acts that were detrimental to the preservation of harmony and disturbed public peace.
“A careful reading of the FIR and the submissions made before this court indicate that the essential ingredients of Section 153A are not satisfied in the present case. The FIR neither specifies the exact statements nor provides any documentary or electronic evidence to show that the petitioner has engaged in speech or conduct that incites enmity or disharmony. The lack of specificity in the allegations raises serious doubts about the bona fides of the prosecution’s case. Moreover, it is well settled in law that the invocation of Section 153A requires a direct and deliberate act of promoting enmity or hatred. For an offence under Section 153A to be constituted, the alleged words or acts must be clearly intentional, targeted, and capable of inciting disorder or violence. Mere reporting of an event of public interest, devoid of inflammatory intent or impact, cannot be construed as an offence under Section 153A,” the judge highlighted.
Goswami had already received interim relief in May 2022. Afterward, he was given a more restricted form of temporary relief in the case from Justice Dinesh Mehta, which was periodically extended. The state had requested that this temporary protection be removed. The obvious absence of specific allegations in th FIR against him, based on Justice Ali’s observation, cast serious doubt on the prosecution’s case and supported the initial suspicion that it was being used as “an instrument of harassment rather than a legitimate legal proceeding.” The next hearing of the case is after 8 weeks.
Background of the case
Goswami petitioned the high court to have the FIR against the broadcast dismissed. He maintained in his petition that the FIR was politically motivated and intended to harass and implicate Republic TV via legal cases. “In a case where the Congress Government of the state of Rajasthan was being questioned, a member of the Congress has filed a complaint. This establishes how the entire case is motivated and made to harass and embroil a legitimate news network and its members in a litany of cases,” the appeal submitted.
It further stated that rather than upsetting communal harmony, the broadcasts were intended to preserve it. “In fact, the channels also covered how a Muslim Group had filed a complaint naming Congress Zilla Head Yogesh Mishra for vitiating harmony in the region. Therefore, far from causing strife, Republic was exposing it.”
The words “Jahangirpuri ka badla” was used in the show regarding the demolition of Alwar. Goswami asserted the purpose of this sentence was to raise concerns about whether the demolition campaign was driven by political motivations rather than focus on any particular community.
The plea stated, “It is submitted that there was an uproar over a demolition drive in New Delhi’s Jahangirpuri on 20-21st April, 2022. This demolition was being done by the Delhi MCD which is headed by the BJP. Soon after, there was news of the Alwar Demolition in Rajashtan where there is a Congress government in power. Therefore, the question about ‘Jahangirpuri Ka Badla’ were being raised in the context of it being a political battle over demolition.”
The motion further noted that there was no disruption of public order following the broadcast. It proved that the show did not in any way endanger or disturb the peace on the ground. Additionally, Goswami informed the court that he had no personal involvement in the telecast, discussion or telecast nor was he involved in Republic Bharat’s daily decision-making process.
The case was called to be a blatant abuse of the legal system driven by political vendettas and other factors. Likewise, it was contended that the selective start of criminal proceedings against the petitioner when similar reports were published by other media houses raises major concerns about the probe’s objectivity and motivation. Goswami added that the filing of the FIR seemed to be an attempt to intimidate and silence independent journalism ,which is a cornerstone of democracy.
