The Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to stop criminal defamation proceedings against Aaj Tak in the Gopal Kanda–Sonali Phogat case. The Court said the magistrate’s order and investigation procedure were legally valid.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana High Court refused to cancel the criminal defamation case going on against TV Today Network-owned news channel Aaj Tak.
The case was filed by former Haryana MLA and businessman Gopal Kanda (Gopal Kumar Goyal), after the channel allegedly linked his name to the murder of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and actress Sonali Phogat in 2022.
The Gurgaon Police had earlier filed a chargesheet against Aaj Tak and some other media channels in connection with the allegations of defamation. TV Today had approached the High Court and challenged both the magistrate’s order as well as the chargesheet filed against it.
Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya, while hearing the matter, observed that Kanda’s complaint clearly showed that a non-cognizable offence was made out. Because of this, Kanda had moved to the magistrate under Section 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
The Court explained that the magistrate, in his powers, directed the police to register a non-cognizable case (NCR) and conduct investigation.
The Court ruled that the magistrate did have the authority to give such a direction. It explained that under Section 155(2) of the CrPC, the magistrate is fully empowered to order an investigation into a non-cognizable offence. Therefore, the Court said the process followed in this case was correct and there was nothing illegal about the investigation carried out after the NCR registration.
On the other hand, Aaj Tak (TV Today Network) argued that the magistrate’s procedure was not according to law. The channel said that in cases of defamation, the law specifically bars registration of any FIR and investigation, as per Section 199 of the CrPC.
It argued that because of this legal bar, the magistrate could not have used Section 156(3) of CrPC to direct police action.
But the High Court did not accept this argument. The Court clarified that in this case, the magistrate had not given any direction under Section 156(3) of CrPC for FIR registration.
The Court made it clear by stating,
“Investigation in the case has been carried out on the basis of complaint by second respondent disclosing non-cognizable offence against the petitioner, and chargesheet has been filed pursuant to directions issued under Section 155(2) CrPC.”
Because of this reasoning, the High Court dismissed the plea filed by TV Today Network and refused to stop the criminal defamation proceedings against the channel.
- TV Today Network Limited was represented by Advocates Hrishikesh Baruah and Jasneet Kaur.
- The State of Haryana was represented by Senior Deputy Advocate General Tanushree Gupta.
CASE TITLE:
TV Today Network Limited vs State of Haryana and Another
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Aaj Tak
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
