Court Says Every Journalist Is Entitled To Protection, Quashes Sedition Case Against Vinod Dua
The Supreme Court quashed the sedition case registered against journalist Vinod Dua in Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, news agency PTI reported. The case was filed against Dua by a local BJP leader in Himachal Pradesh over his YouTube show.
A bench of Justices U U Lalit and Vineet Saran had on October 6 last year reserved the verdict on the petition after hearing arguments for Dua, the Himachal Pradesh government and the complainant in the case.
Comments by SC
On the issue of protection of freedom of speech and expression of media personnel, it said, ¡°Every journalist is entitled to protection under the Kedar Nath Singh judgment (the famous verdict of 1962 on the scope and ambit of offence of sedition in the IPC).¡±
While cancelling the case, the Supreme Court rejected Dua's request that no FIR be registered against any journalist with 10 years' experience unless cleared by a panel headed by a High Court judge.This would amount to encroaching on the domain of the legislature, said Justices UU Lalit and Vineet Saran.
The case against Dua
Dua was accused of having made certain ¡®objectionable statements¡¯ on his YouTube programme, 'Vinod Dua show'. The First Information Report was registered against him based on a complaint filed by BJP leader Ajay Shyam.He alleged the statements in the episode streamed on 30 March 2020 were capable of inciting communal hatred and led to breach of peace and communal disharmony.
The complainant had alleged that the journalist accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of using ¡°deaths and terror attacks¡± to get votes.?He was also accused in the FIR of spreading fake news, causing public nuisance, printing defamatory material, and making statements amounting to public mischief.
Charges against him
He was charged with grave offences under the IPC including sedition (section 124A), public nuisance (section 268), printing defamatory matter (section 501) and intent to cause public mischief (section 505).Dua was also charged for offences under the Disaster Management Act, including those of spreading misinformation and false claims.
The senior journalist went to the Supreme Court against the FIR and sought "exemplary damages for harassment".?Dua in his petition before the Supreme Court submitted that the video in question critically analysed the failures of the Government of India concerning the declaration of a nationwide lockdown and how it was implemented.?
The 1962 order that protects journalists
The court said a 1962 order protects every journalist from such charges.?While upholding validity of section 124A (sedition) of the IPC, the top court in 1962 had ruled the sedition charges could not be invoked against a citizen for criticism of government actions as it would be in conformity with the freedom of speech and expression.?
On July 20 last year, the top court had extended till further orders the protection granted to Dua from any coercive action in the case.?
