Nithyakalyani Narayanan. V
On September 15th, the Supreme Court extended the interim protection from arrest by two weeks, to four members of the Editors Guild of India in the FIRs registered for publishing a fact-finding report on the Manipur violence.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra asked, “Making a false statement in an article is not an offence of 153A- it may be incorrect statements. Incorrect statements are made by journalists across the country, will you prosecute all?”
The CJI remarked that prima facie no offences were made out against the journalists. He questioned why the FIRs should not be quashed – “Journalists are entitled to put forth a viewpoint…just show us how these offences (mentioned in the FIRs) are made out. This is just a report. You have implicated sections which are not made out.”
Senior Advocate S. Gurukrishna Kumar, who represented the complainant, told the Court that if the Editors Guild withdraws their report, he will stop pursuing his complaint. The CJI responded to it saying “Please explain how all these offences are established. Let’s examine Section 153A, and we want to make it clear that we are considering the jurisdiction to quash. What’s going on here?”
He further added, “In a case like this, your complaint does it even make out a whisper of the ingredients of the offence.” He also observed that, “We are also concerned because the moment somebody says something in print, it may be wrong or right or whatever. Your entire complaint appears to be a counter-narrative to the government. Essentially, you’ve presented a counter-narrative assuming that what they said is false.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Manipur Government, claimed that the intention of the members of the Editors Guild of India is to turn the issue into a national political issue by approaching the Supreme Court instead of the Manipur High Court – “The picture presented, not only by these petitioners but essentially by Mr. Anand Grover, involves facts that have been acknowledged. Even the Bar Association expressed its concerns when it was repeatedly informed that the Court was not functioning, the bar was not in operation, and no lawyers were available. The Bar Association sent a letter to the Registrar General, based on which I have received details provided by the Registrar General to the Bar Association. In the last 15 days, from August 30th to September 14th, a total of 2,683 cases were listed for hearing before various benches of the High Court of Manipur. During the last 30 days, virtual hearings were made available on each working day, and a total of 572 virtual hearing sessions were reported during the same period. Approximately 45 local individuals participated in these virtual hearings. Mr Anand Grover appeared on 6 different days before the Manipur High Court through virtual mode, and Mr. Colin Gonsalves for 2 days. There are a total of 28 advocates empanelled with the Manipur Legal Service Committee who do not belong to either of the two communities. E-filing is also permitted.”
Concluding, Chief Justice Chandrachud directed, “Submit your response and convince us why this is not a case for quashing”. The Court ordered, “Since one of the reliefs which was being sought is of quashing the FIR on the ground that the reading of the complaint does not disclose any of the offences which are sought to be alleged, we grant 2 weeks to file a counter affidavit. There shall be a stay of all further proceedings in the FIR till the next date of hearing.”
On September 2nd, a four-member team of the Editors Guild of India released a 24-page investigative report on the Manipur violence. The research team was sent to Manipur to examine the media reports there. The Editors Guild stated that the media reports on the ethnic violence in Manipur were one-sided and claimed that the state leadership was being partisan. A few days later, the Manipur State Government filed an FIR against the President and three members of the organisation and claimed that they were trying to create more disputes in Manipur.
As per the FIR, the four members of the Editors Guild have been accused of offences under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including promoting enmity between different groups.
Name of the case: Seema Guha And Ors. v. The State Of Manipur And Anr.
Bench: Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra