‘Attempt to suppress journalistic freedom’: Rajasthan HC stays action against Arnab Goswami in hate speech FIR

Appearing for Goswami, Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, assisted by Muktesh Maheshwari and Vandana Bhansali, contended that he “has been falsely implicated” in the 2022 FIR lodged at Udaipur’s Ambamata Police Station under Indian Penal Code section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc).

The case was lodged following a news report by Republic Bharat, a Hindi news channel under the Republic Media Network, regarding the demolition of a temple in Alwar’s Rajgarh.

Goswami’s lawyers said that he “is neither involved in the editorial decision-making of Republic Bharat nor has he participated in any capacity in the telecast, debate, or broadcast relating to the said news.”

The court, in its March 3 order, said, “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.”

Goswami’s lawyers termed the registration of the FIR “a manifest abuse of the legal process, driven by extraneous considerations and political vendetta. The selective initiation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner while similar reports were aired by various media houses raises a serious question about the impartiality of the investigation and its underlying motive. It appears that the registration of the FIR is aimed at intimidating and silencing independent journalism, which is a fundamental pillar of democracy.”

The court observed that the investigation has not been concluded, despite considerable time having been elapsed, “further reinforcing the prima facie view that the FIR is being used as an instrument of harassment rather than a legitimate legal proceeding” and said that no “coercive measures” shall be taken against Goswami in this FIR till the disposal of the main petition.