E-Paper
High court cancels FIR against Jammu journalist, says is attack on press freedom
The Jammu and Kashmir high court’s justice Rajnesh Oswal said the police could have given their version but chose “unique method of silencing the petitioner and it is undoubtedly an attack on the freedom of press”.
Jammu: The Jammu and Kashmir high court on Tuesday cancelled a First Information Report (FIR) registered against a local journalist for a news report on alleged custodial torture of a man in 2018, ruling that the police decision to file charges against the journalist “is undoubtedly an attack on the freedom of press”.
“No fetters can be placed on the freedom of press by registering the FIR against a reporter, who was performing his professional duty by publishing a news item on the basis of information obtained by him from an identifiable source,” justice Rajnesh Oswal said in his ruling delivered on Tuesday. The verdict was uploaded on the high court’s website on Wednesday.
In his April 2018 report published in a local daily Early Times, journalist Asif Iqbal Naik extensively quoted the family members of a Kishtwar resident Akhter Hussain who alleged that he was torture. The police claimed that the news report was factually incorrect and filed an FIR against the journalist, accusing him of trying to instigate the people of Kishtwar against the police by “creating a rage/confusion among the public”. It also accused the journalist of provoking people to vandalism.
The FIR accused Naik of offences under sections 500 (defamation), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) and 505 (statement conducting to public mischief) of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC).
The judge said, “the mere fact that FIR was lodged only against the journalist and not against the person, who has disclosed the said incident to the journalist prima facie establishes malice on the part of the respondents.” It also noted that the reported allegations were repeated by the man’s family in complaints to the police.
“The mode and manner in which the impugned FIR has been lodged clearly reflects the mala fide on the part of respondents as the respondents could have given their version by similar mode but they chose unique method of silencing the petitioner and it is undoubtedly an attack on the freedom of press,” the judge said in his 14-page verdict.
The court said the police, which disputed the facts, should have given its version to the newspaper contesting the allegations.
Naik said the high court came to his rescue in 2018 as well when the Kishtwar administration barred him from entering the district magistrate’s office complex for the second time after reports that he said, “exposed the corrupt practices of the officials” there.
He said the FIR was registered against him because he sought action against the officer who misused his power. “The case is a classic example of settling personal grudges by a senior police official (through use of his power),” he said.
