Allahabad HC Quashes Case Against Aroon Purie, Prabhu Chawla Over India Today 2003 Report on Child Trafficking
Court held that the story highlighting sexual exploitation of minor girls was in public interest and protected under freedom of speech
The Allahabad High Court quashes case against Prabhu Chawla, Aroon Purie over 2003 child trafficking report
The Allahabad High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against India Today former Editor Prabhu Chawla and Editor-in-Chief Aroon Purie, holding that a 2003 article exposing child trafficking and sexual exploitation did not promote enmity between communities, as alleged in a complaint filed nearly two decades ago.
A complaint was filed in 2004 by one Ehtisham Mirza before the Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI), Lucknow, alleging that an India Today feature on the trafficking of minor girls in Murshidabad contained objectionable remarks that could create disharmony between the Bediya and Muslim communities. The magistrate had taken cognizance under Sections 153 and 153A of the IPC and summoned the two senior journalists in May 2007.
Chawla and Purie challenged the order before the Allahabad High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, arguing that the article was based on factual reporting and aimed at exposing the grim realities of sexual exploitation rather than inflaming communal sentiments.
The bench of Justice Brij Raj Singh observed that a plain reading of the publication revealed no attempt to promote hatred or enmity between communities.
The source of the article is mentioned, and the information was brought to public attention to show that minor girls were being trafficked and used for sexual abuse. Even if unrest within the Bediya community was mentioned, it cannot be construed as hostility between communities, the court said.
"It is nowhere mentioned that Bediya community has unrest against muslim community. The intention has to be judged by the language of the article published in ‘Indian Today’ Magazine," court opined.
The bench emphasized that the intention behind the publication was critical in determining criminal liability under Section 153A. Citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State of Maharashtra and Patricia Mukhim v. State of Meghalaya, Justice Singh noted that the “intention to cause disorder or incite violence” is the sine qua non for offences under this section.
“The plight of sexual exploitation of minor girls, as depicted in the article, does not create any unrest between two groups or communities,” the order read, adding that the article “highlighted sex slavery and human trafficking without any intent to promote hatred".
The court also invoked Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, reaffirming the importance of freedom of speech and expression as a fundamental right. Facts pertaining to a particular area involving sexual exploitation were published in good faith. Such reporting falls squarely within the constitutional protection guaranteed to citizens, the court observed.
Holding that the ingredients of the offences were not made out, court set aside the summoning order dated May 7, 2007, and quashed the entire criminal proceedings pending before the Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI), Lucknow.
Case Title: Prabhu Chawla vs State of UP and Another with connected matter
Order Date: October 13, 2025
Bench: Justice Brij Raj Singh