India SC terms complaint against Editors Guild 'counter-narrative of gov ppt'

India's Supreme Court yesterday termed a complaint, lodged in the ethnic strife-affected state of Manipur, against the Editors Guild of India (EGI) and its four members a "counter-narrative of the government".

It also asked how the offence of promoting enmity between different groups under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code was made out against the EGI, which merely gave a report at the army's request.

"Assuming that what they [the EGI fact-finding team to Manipur] said is false and every para is false, making a false statement in an article is not an offence under section 153A (of the IPC). It may be incorrect. Incorrect things are reported all across the country every day, will you prosecute journalists for 153A?" an apex court bench said.

Read more

Manipur violence: SC protects four members of Editors Guild of India

"Mr Solicitor General, the Army writes to the Editors Guild of India. The Army says that there is partisan reporting, please come and make a proper report. They go to the ground. They may be right or wrong but that is what free speech is all about," Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, who headed the bench, said, reports our New Delhi correspondent.

Extending the protection from coercive action to the EGI members by two more weeks, the bench of Justice Chandrachud and justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra sought a response of the complainant and said it would examine the complaint which formed the basis of the FIRs against them.

The top court was also critical of the fact that the Manipur High Court entertained the PIL against the EGI.

The CJI was referring to the plea filed by the International Meitei Forum seeking quashing of the report submitted by the EGI.

"The manner in which that PIL is entertained by the Chief Justice of the High Court...let me not say much more as the head of the family. But surely there are more pressing matters to be entertained than these kinds of PILs," he said.

However, the top court took serious note of the submission of Guru Krishnakumar, a senior advocate appearing for the complainant, that the EGI members have committed criminal offences by making "sweeping one-sided" allegations without even making me a party.

The bench asked how the offences under Sections 153 (promoting enmity between different groups) and 200 (making false declaration in courts) of the IPC were made out against the EGI members.

"Let us see Section 200. This deals with making a false declaration before a court ... Therefore, this is subject to section 195 of CrPC. Where was the declaration made before the court? This is just a report," the top court said.

"You have to show us in a case like this that your complaint makes out a case. Does it even make out a whisper of the ingredients of the offence?" Justice Chandrachud asked.

"We are also concerned because this can't be that the moment somebody says something in print, a case is filed. Your entire complaint is the counter-narrative of the government. You have basically put forth a counter-narrative, assuming that what they have said is false," it said.

The Solicitor General urged that keeping in mind the sensitivity of the situation in Manipur, the court should not say all these things and refer the matter to the Delhi High Court

The counsel for the complainant said if the EGI withdraws the report, the complainant will not press the complaint.

At the outset, the solicitor general objected to the Supreme Court entertaining the petition from EGI, for protection from coercive action, and said the petitioners should avail of the remedy before the High Court.

On September 4, Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh had said a police case had been filed on a complaint against the president and three members of the EGI, and accused them of trying to "provoke clashes" in the state.

Besides EGI president Seema Mustafa, those who have been booked are senior journalists Seema Guha, Bharat Bhushan and Sanjay Kapoor. They visited the state between August 7 and 10 to study media reporting on the ethnic violence.

The Editors Guild, in a report published on September 2, slammed the internet ban in the state as being detrimental to media reportage. It also condemned what it termed as one-sided reporting.

"There are clear indications that the leadership of the state became partisan during the conflict. It should have avoided taking sides in the ethnic conflict but it failed to do its duty as a democratic government which should have represented the entire state," the report said.

"They are anti-state, anti-national and anti-establishment (people) who came to pour venom. Had I known it before, I would not have allowed them to enter," the chief minister had said.

The EGI said in its report it received several representations about the media in Manipur playing a partisan role in the ongoing ethnic conflict between the Meitei and Kuki-Chin communities.