Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

A matter was recently brought before the Allahabad High Court concerning a gang operating across Uttar Pradesh. Allegedly, this group, masquerading as journalists, is involved in antisocial activities such as blackmailing individuals for financial and other benefits by threatening to publish defamatory material against them in newspapers.

Justice Shamim Ahmed emphasized the seriousness of the situation, urging the state machinery to address the issue promptly and revoke the licenses of these so-called journalists.

The judge said that the state government has mechanisms in place capable of stopping such activities if the allegations are found to be true.

Court was dealing with an application filed under Section 482 of the CrPC by Puneet Mishra and another seeking direction to quash a case registered against them under Sections 384, 352, 504, and 505 of the IPC, as well as Sections 3(2)(Va) and 3(1)(S) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, at Beniganj Police Station in Hardoi, Uttar Pradesh.

Mishra claimed to be a journalist working for Swatantra Bharat, while the other accused, who is disabled, claimed to be the newspaper distributor.

The accused argued that the case against them was fabricated and that the police had submitted the charge sheet without proper investigation. They alleged that they were falsely implicated because they had reported on the illegal cutting of a protected green tree in their newspaper.

Conversely, the government advocate and Additional Advocate General contended that the accused were involved in blackmailing individuals by taking photographs and publishing defamatory material in newspapers. They also pointed out that the accused had not provided a valid journalist license issued by the State Information Department with their plea.

After considering the arguments placed by the counsel for both sides and after perusal of the record, the single judge bench opined that the impugned summoning order as well as the chargesheet and the cognizance order filed against the accused were perfectly just and legal. 

The judge held that prima facie cognizable offence was made out against the accused persons as alleged. 

Apart from that, court noted that Mishra, who claimed to be a journalist for the newspaper Swatantra Bharat, was unable to provide any documentation verifying his association with the publication. Despite inquiries from the court, neither the applicants nor their counsel could produce any such evidence, court highlighted. 

Thus, court refused to exercise its power under Section 482, CrPC to quash the proceedings against the accused persons and dismissed their plea. 

Case Title: Puneet Mishra and Another v. State of UP