The complaint alleged that on March 27 of the previous year, Republic TV Kannada aired a story claiming that traffic on Bengaluru’s MG Road was stopped to clear the way for Chief Minister Siddaramaiah. The report also said that this caused an ambulance to be denied the right of way. However, the complainant pointed out that the Chief Minister was not in Bengaluru at that time; he was in Mysuru.
Karnataka: On Thursday, 13th Feb, the Karnataka High Court dismissed the criminal case filed against Arnab Goswami, the editor-in-chief of Republic TV, by the Bengaluru police. The case was based on accusations that Republic TV aired a fake news story about Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, who heard the matter, said that the criminal case was “an abuse of the legal process on the face of it” and decided to quash it. Goswami had earlier sought interim relief from the court, which was granted, and on Thursday, his petition to quash the case was accepted.
The judge made some strong remarks, questioning the very basis of the case.
“Court wants to know what is the offence? Absolutely nothing, abuse (of process of law) on its face,” the judge said. He further stated that the case was without merit and proceeded to quash it.
BACKGROUND
The FIR (First Information Report) against Goswami was filed after a private complaint by Ravindra MV, a member of the Karnataka Congress.
The complaint alleged that on March 27 of the previous year, Republic TV Kannada aired a story claiming that traffic on Bengaluru’s MG Road was stopped to clear the way for Chief Minister Siddaramaiah. The report also said that this caused an ambulance to be denied the right of way. However, the complainant pointed out that the Chief Minister was not in Bengaluru at that time; he was in Mysuru.
ALSO READ: Mumbai Court Dismisses TRP Manipulation Case Against Republic TV
Goswami was charged under Section 505(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with making statements that create or promote enmity, hatred, or ill-will between different communities or groups.
During the earlier hearings, Goswami’s lawyer, Senior Advocate Aruna Shyam, defended the journalist by stating that the incorrect news report was removed immediately after the channel realized it was false. Shyam further pointed out that the complainant seemed to be “overenthusiastic” and had even “suggested” in the complaint which section of the IPC should be used against Goswami.
ALSO READ: Delhi HC Dismisses Contempt Plea by Times Group Against Republic TV, Arnab Goswami
The court had earlier observed that invoking Section 505 of the IPC in this case was not applicable in the “remotest form.” The judge also criticized the manner in which the complaint was filed, calling it an example of a “reckless registration of crime” by the complainant.
The judge added that allowing such complaints to proceed would be “an abuse of the process of the law.”
