TV5 & ABN News charged with sedition against Andhra Govt., move Supreme Court

A plea has been filed in Supreme Court by news channel “TV 5” seeking quashing of the FIR No. 12/2021 (“impugned FIR”) registered by the CID PS, A.P., Amaravathi, Mangalagiri under Sections 124A, 153A, 505 r/w 120B of the Indian Penal Code against the news channel.

The Petitioner has also sought for quashing of the Enquiry Report dated 14.05.2021, which formed the basis of the impugned FIR, a stay on any consequential investigation & seeking an order restraining the State of Andhra Pradesh from taking any coercive action against the Petitioner Company, its news channels, or their employees.

It has been argued that the only allegation in the impugned FIR against the Petitioner’s channel TV5 is that TV5 alloted “premediated” and “organised” slots to Mr. Raju, which according to the impugned FIR evinced a meeting of minds amongst the accused persons.

“FIR fails to identify the specific speech which is offending and the time of airing of such speech in the Petitioners news channel. The FIR particularly fails to make out the offences alleged by it against any of the accused persons, let alone the Petitioner herein. The FIR is completely oblivious to the functioning of media channels and attempts to make something routine into a dreaded offence.”, the plea states. 

The State Government and its members have acted in a hostile manner against the news channels critiquing its various policies. The State Government has also caused a number of obstructions to media channels, including TV5.

The petitioners have averred that failure to interject by the Top Court would result in the petitioners being meted out the same treatment to which the main accused person Mr. Raghurama Krishnam Raju is being subjected to. 

The FIR filed against the petitioner has been assailed on the following grounds:

• Firstly, the only vague allegation in the FIR against TV5 is that some of the offending speeches of Mr. Raju were made on its channel. However, the FIR fails to identify such offending speech, or the “premediated” and “organised” time slot when they were made.
• Secondly, the impugned FIR seeks to criminalise the act of airing the views of a sitting Member of Parliament, who is a public figure, in a news channel; which is not only clearly violative of the Petitioner’s right to freedom of speech and expression and also creates a chilling effect for media houses in the state.
• Thirdly, the impugned FIR miserably fails to establish any nexus of TV5 to any of the alleged offences. The impugned FIR against TV5 is premised on the fact that there were premediated and organised slots given to Mr. Raju, which is not substantiated in the FIR and even otherwise cannot be termed as a criminal act as public figures are often hosted at designated time slots in news channels.
• Fourthly, in pursuance of the impugned FIR, the Respondents have already initiated coercive action against Mr. Raju by arresting him and reportedly subjecting him to custodial torture. The Petitioners apprehend that the purpose of the mala fide FIR is to curb dissent in the State and cause a chilling effect on media houses.

Reliance has been placed on the Apex Court judgement in Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India, (2020) 14 SCC 12 to submit that the freedom of speech of the media is of great importance and the impugned FIR clearly intends to breach the same by chilling the media houses into submission.

Case Title: M/S Shreya Broadcasting Pvt. Ltd. And Another V. The State Of Andhra Pradesh And Others