Phoenix Legal | View firm profile
The Jodhpur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court on 3.03.2025 allowed the application for stay of investigation in connection with an FIR against the Editor-in-Chief of Republic Media Network, Mr. Arnab Goswami in relation to criminal proceedings instituted against him in Udaipur. We are delighted to share that Phoenix Legal led by our Partner, Zoeb Cutlerywala successfully represented Mr. Goswami in the said matter.
Brief narration of the case:
The case involves registration of FIR No. 276 against Arnab Goswami, Editor-in-Chief of the Republic Media Network, and another person, under sections 153A, 295A, 120B, 499, 501, 504 and 505 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and relevant sections of the Information Technology Act, 2000, read with the NSA Act. The FIR was registered at Police Station Ambamata, Udaipur, Rajasthan, based on a complaint by Mr. Pawan Khera, Spokesperson of the All-India Congress Committee. The complaint alleges that the accused spread false, malicious, and ill-motivated lies against the Government of Rajasthan, intending to destabilize it and incite communal disharmony.
Legal arguments advanced on behalf of the Petitioner include: (i) The Petitioner claims no involvement in the day-to-day operations of ‘Republic Bharat’ and did not participate in the broadcast in question related to the temple demolition in Rajgarh and he has neither any role to play in the day-to-day operations of R. Bharat; (ii) The FIR does not disclose any specific date or time of the alleged statements, making it baseless makes no reference to any date and time; (iii) The FIR does not constitute any offense under the sections mentioned and that the proceedings are arbitrary and malicious allegations in FIR No. 276, even if they are taken on their face value.
In summary, the Petitioner argued that the FIR is politically motivated, lacks a factual basis, and constitutes an abuse of legal process aimed at silencing a free press.
After hearing the parties on 3.03.2025, the Court held as follows: (i) The allegations in the FIR do not disclose an offence under Section 153A of the IPC do not disclose the commission of an offence; (ii) The FIR lacks essential particulars such as exact statements or evidence demonstrating the Petitioner’s culpability lacks essential particulars such as the exact nature; (iii) The continued investigation appears to suppress journalistic freedom and subject the Petitioner to unwarranted legal proceedings attempt to suppress journalistic freedom.
The Stay Application was allowed with a direction that no coercive measures shall be taken against the Petitioner until the disposal of the main petition.
In summary, the court has granted a stay on coercive actions against the Petitioner, citing insufficient evidence and concerns over journalistic freedom.