The Delhi High Court’s proceedings highlighted the gravity of journalistic responsibility and the consequences of defamation. While the sting operation and the recorded conversations involved in the case were not disputed, the court found Tejpal and his colleagues liable for defamation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has recently issued a significant directive in a defamation case involving Tarun Tejpal, the former editor-in-chief of Tehelka magazine, and Aniruddha Bahal, the co-founder. The court ordered them to publish an unconditional apology in a national English newspaper, addressing the defamation of former Major General MS Ahluwalia in a 2001 news report.
The case dates back to 2001 when Tehelka published a report portraying Ahluwalia as a corrupt figure in defense deals. This portrayal led Ahluwalia to file a defamation lawsuit in 2002, claiming the report falsely accused him of bribery related to defense equipment transactions.
In a hearing conducted by a division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, Tejpal and Bahal were instructed to issue a public apology. This decision follows a previous order by a single judge last year, which required Tejpal, Bahal, Tehelka, and journalist Mathew Samuel to compensate Ahluwalia with Rs. 2 crores for the defamation.
During the latest proceedings, Tejpal and Bahal agreed to deposit Rs. 10 lakhs each with the High Court. The bench stipulated that the apology and the monetary deposit must be completed within a two-week timeframe, with the case scheduled for final review in April, focusing on the quantum of damages.
The court acknowledged the substantial impact of the defamation on Ahluwalia’s reputation. The allegations in the report had serious implications, casting a shadow over Ahluwalia’s character and integrity. The court noted that such allegations could cause irreparable damage to an individual’s public image and professional standing.
The court’s proceedings highlighted the gravity of journalistic responsibility and the consequences of defamation. While the sting operation and the recorded conversations involved in the case were not disputed, the court found Tejpal and his colleagues liable for defamation. The case also involved considerations regarding the involvement of other parties, including Zee Telefilm Limited and its executives, although they were not found liable for defamation.
The Delhi High Court’s directive for an unconditional apology from Tejpal and Bahal underscores the importance of accountability in journalism. This case serves as a reminder of the legal and ethical responsibilities of media professionals, especially when reporting on matters that can significantly affect individuals’ reputations and careers.