Delhi Court cautions ED to act fairly and avoid sensationalism on social media, stressing that any misleading or defamatory content may violate Article 21. “Such abuse of power undermines fundamental rights and agency’s integrity.”
A Delhi court issued a warning to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Thursday, emphasizing the necessity for the agency to operate impartially and ensure that information shared through its official social media channels is precise and devoid of sensationalism.
Special Judge Jitendera Singh of the Rouse Avenue Courts stated that if facts are presented in a misleading or defamatory way, it could damage the agency’s reputation and infringe upon the individual’s right to a good reputation.
The Court stated,
“It is incumbent upon an investigative agency such as the ED to act impartially and uphold the principles of fairness and due process. Any dissemination of information, including but not limited to official social media platforms, must be accurate, non-misleading, and free from sensationalism. The presentation of facts in a manner that is misleading, scandalous, or intended to defame or politically prejudice an individual would not only undermine the integrity of the agency but may also amount to an abuse of power and violation of the individual’s fundamental rights, including the right to reputation under Article 21 of the Constitution,”
This observation came while the court dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former Delhi minister Satyendar Jain against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Bansuri Swaraj.
Jain had sued Swaraj for defamation related to an interview on the news channel Aaj Tak, where she claimed that the ED had recovered 1.8 kg of gold, 133 gold coins, and Rs.3 crore in cash from his residence.
Swaraj’s assertion was based on a tweet from the ED, which noted,
“ED has conducted searches on 6.6.2022 under PMLA, 2002 at the premises of Satyendar Kumar Jain and others. Various incriminating documents, digital records, cash amounting to Rs. 2.85 Crore and 133 gold coins weighing 1.80 kg in total from unexplained source have been seized.”
Jain contended that no cash or gold was seized from his premises, as indicated in the ED’s panchnama, and argued that Swaraj’s claims were unfounded.
Read Also: Supreme Court: ED Required Special Court Permission to Arrest PMLA Accused
After reviewing the case, Judge Singh determined that the ED’s tweet created the impression that the cash was confiscated from Jain’s location.
Consequently, while dismissing Jain’s complaint against Swaraj, the Court reiterated the importance of the ED acting impartially and ensuring that all information shared is accurate, non-misleading, and free from sensationalism.
Read Attachment