SC gives three weeks of interim protection to Arnab Goswami
The Supreme Court on Friday heard a plea of journalist Arnab Goswami seeking quashing of multiple FIRs filed against him for allegedly making defamatory statements against interim Congress President Sonia Gandhi. A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah heard the matter remotely, as eight lawyers argued. Giving him interim protection for three weeks, SC said no coercive action should be taken.
Using Palghar lynching, Arnab attacked Sonia on his show
Arnab, who heads the Republic media group, had during one of the prime-time news segments launched a blitzkrieg on Sonia, holding her responsible for the Palghar lynching. In the incident of the Maharashtra town, two sadhus and their driver were beaten to death by a mob. In the debate, Arnab attacked Sonia's Italian roots and claimed she must have been happy with the deaths.
FIRs were filed, Arnab went to SC
Soon, a flurry of FIRs was registered against him in states like Maharashtra, Delhi, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, and Punjab. Challenging the same, Arnab knocked on SC's doors late last night and his plea was listed for hearing this morning. His representative Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi said the journalist was merely asking questions on the Palghar incident, without giving it a "religious angle".
Rohatgi claimed Congress chief only condemns attacks on minorities
"In Palghar issue debate on his show, he raised some "provocative questions" to the Congress chief by saying when people from the minority are killed, Congress party is the first to raise issues," Rohatgi argued, saying such questions are raised during a public debate.
Only aggrieved person can complain of defamation: Rohatgi
Rohatgi commented that only an aggrieved person can complain of defamation. Referring to the attack on Arnab and his wife, Rohatgi said, "I have impleaded the States. I can implead the complaints also. But I couldn't since I had to file in one day because of the murderous attack." Rohatgi demanded protection for Arnab in these FIRs and other cases that could be filed.
"Is Arnab privileged that FIRs can't be filed against him?"
Dismissing these arguments, senior lawyer Kapil Sibal accused Arnab of inciting communal tensions in the country. "You are trying to ignite communal violence here by pitting Hindus against minorities," he said. Sibal also wondered why FIRs can't be filed against Arnab. "Is he a privileged person," the lawyer asked. "If Congress-people have filed FIRs then what's the problem. Don't BJP people file FIRs?"
At least the matter should be probed, said Sibal
"Here you are not allowing us to investigate, while in Kanhaiya Kumar's case, it was investigated. You are fuelling communal violence. Somebody has filed a complaint. Police will investigate to find out if one can be prosecuted," Sibal went on.
During hearing, angry Sibal asked what was happening in country
During the hearing, Justice Chandrachud quizzed whether Article 32 can be invoked since multiple FIRs were registered against the same cause of action. On this, Sibal said it can be used for clubbing FIRs but not for giving protection. Making a case for investigation, Sibal asked, "What is happening in this country?" His party colleague Abhishek Manu Singhvi also opined investigation shouldn't be halted.
Arnab can file for anticipatory bail in three weeks
In its verdict, SC said no coercive action can be taken against Arnab for three weeks. He can apply for an anticipatory bail in this period. "Any other FIR filed hereafter shall also remain stayed till further orders," the court commented. Mumbai Police Commissioner was asked to provide security to Arnab and Republic TV. The matter will be heard again after eight weeks.
