Read Time: 07 minutes

The Supreme Court today issued notice in a plea filed 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.

A Full Bench of Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice LN Rao and Justice SR Bhatt while directing the respondents to not initiate any coercive action against the news channel observed, “We are of the view that provisions of 124 A and 153 require interpretation particularly on the right of press.”

Senior Advocate(s) Shyam Divan and Siddharth Luthra appeared for the petitioner.

Senior Advocate Shyam Divan submitted that Inquiry Report dated 14.05.2021, which formed the basis of the impugned FIR was filed on the basis of Social Media and the reports on YouTube and Facebook.

Justice Bhat to Senior Advocate Shyam Divan: Mr. Divan there is reference to certain expressions, can you provide translation of it?

Justice LN Rao (Clarifying): What you are looking at means "disrobe you and kick you" and the other means "we all will come and beat you"

At this juncture, Justice DY Chandrachud remarked, “It is time that we define the limits of Sedition”

The petitioners along with quashing of FIR and inquiry report, had also sought for a stay on any consequential investigation and coercive action by the State, against Petitioners, its news channels or employees.

Allegation in the impugned FIR against the Petitioner channel TV5 was that it gave “premediated” and “organised” slots to Mr. Raju, which according to the impugned FIR, evinced meeting of minds amongst the accused persons.

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.

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