The Calcutta High Court recently ordered a stay of proceedings in a case brought against news channel ABP Ananda for airing two programs that included an interview with a sitting High Court judge. The court did this because it found that the investigation against the news channel had been started by the authorities on the basis of a complaint that had a clear political bent.
It should be noted that ABP Ananda aired an interview with Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyay, one of the High Court’s current judges, last month in which he spoke in-depth about a number of orders he had issued, including one ordering the Central Bureau of Investigation to look into claims of recruitment scams involving the hiring of teachers and non-teaching staff in West Bengal’s public schools.
Summary of the case
On September 27, 2022, an All-India Trinamool Congress (AITC) member filed a complaint against ABP Ananda and its staff for airing a political leader of the former ruling party of the State’s speech and for showing an interview with a sitting High Court judge.
He argued that both of these broadcasts were politically controversial and had the potential to damage the reputation of the state’s current ruling party. Additionally, it was claimed that the news outlet and its staff were complicit in fabricating stories in order to harm the reputation of the AITC and frighten viewers.
The reported incident was handled as a First Information Report for violations of Sections 153, 155A, 153B, 500, 505(1)(b), and 120B.
High Court Observations
Alipore High Court’s observations were taken into account when ABP Ananda filed the present petition with the High Court in an effort to stop the inquiry into the case and halt the proceedings while they were pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
After carefully examining the complaint, the Court initially observed that it contained a number of assumptions about the potential effects of the telecasts in question (a speech by a political leader and an interview with the sitting judge).
The Court further noted that claims made in the complaint about potential public unrest, incitement of hatred, disruption of peace and harmony in the State, and instilling false alarm in the minds of the public as a result of the telecasts in question were merely conjectures and did not reveal the fact of the actual commission of the specific offenses mentioned in the complaint.
Notably, the Court also criticized the beginning of the inquiry after the complaint in issue was filed, noting that both the complaint and the investigation in question lacked the necessary factual and legal support.
As a result, the Court halted the investigation until the case was heard by the Regular Bench, and it was then scheduled to be heard on November 7, 2022.
News Mania Desk
