Sedition case against senior journalist Vinod Dua

Introduction

Vinod Dua (born 11 March 1954) an Indian media personality started career from Doordarshan India. He has been awarded the Padma Shri for Journalism in 2008 by the Government of India. The Supreme Court on Friday protected the   senior journalist and Padma Shri awardee Vinod Dua from arrest till further orders in a sedition case registered by the Himachal Pradesh Police for his telecast on the Delhi riots in February.

 In an urgently convened virtual court hearing on Sunday, a three-judge Bench led by Justice U. U. Lalit agreed to Mr. Dua’s terms to the police that he would join the investigation through videoconferencing or online mode, keeping in mind travel restrictions imposed amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court said Himachal Pradesh Police was “entitled to carry on the investigation, including interrogation of the petitioner (Vinod Dua) at his residence after giving him prior notice of 24 hours”.

The police should comply with the social distancing norms, the apex court ordered.

The court sought a detailed status report on the investigation from the State of Himachal Pradesh by the next hearing on July 6.

The afffidavit

“The affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the State (Himachal Pradesh) shall indicate the steps taken during investigation and a complete status report shall be filed before the next date of hearing. The Investigating Officer shall remain personally present in case the open court hearing is resumed by this court or shall be available in case the proceedings are taken up through video conferencing mode,” the order read.

The court has also asked the Centre to a plea made by Mr. Dua that no FIR (First Information Report) should be registered against journalists with at least 10 years of standing unless cleared by a committee constituted by the respective State governments. These committees should comprise the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned or a Judge designated by the Chief Justice, the Leader of the Opposition and the State Home Minister, the petition had suggested.

The charges against Vinod Dua

The complaint, believed to be filed by a local Bharatiya Janata Party leader, accused Mr. Dua of spreading fake news. Besides sedition, the other charges raised against the senior journalist include causing public nuisance, printing of defamatory matter and making statements conducive to public mischief.

Dua has been summoned by the Shimla police, which registered a sedition case against him following a complaint by a local BJP leader, Ajay Shyam, over his YouTube show. In the show, Dua spoke about the Northeast Delhi riots that took place in February.

Shyam has alleged that Dua accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of using “deaths and terror attacks” to get votes. He asserted that Dua instigated violence against the government and the prime minister by spreading false and malicious news.

Dua has been charged under sections 124A (sedition)( Sedition is a serious felony punishable by fines and up to 20 years in prison and it refers to the act of inciting revolt or violence against a lawful authority with the goal of destroying or overthrowing it.), 268 (public nuisance), 501 (printing matter known to be defamatory) and 505 (statements conducive to public mischief) on the basis of a Shyam’s complaint last month.

The summons were issued two days after the Delhi High Court stayed the investigation in a similar case filed by BJP spokesperson Naveen Kumar.

Justice Anup J. Bhambhani Wednesday noted that there was an unexplained delay of nearly three months in filing the complaint and lodging of the FIR.

The court observed that it was of a prima facie view that further proceedings or probe are likely to cause unjustified harassment to Dua and stayed the investigation until 23 July.

He said that “whenever there is something that the government does not find palatable”, there is “harassment” through such FIRs.

He also asserted that the complainant in the case is a “puppet in the hands” of the ruling party, but was asked by the court to not “use such adjectives”.

Conclusion

In the video, Dua did not explicitly say Modi “has used deaths and terror attacks to garner votes”. He said that most within the media looked to spin everything into an event for the Prime Minister, and added that the Pathankot and Pulwama attacks and the Balakot strike had been “politicised” to seek votes.

Dua’s petition also raises the issue of state governments registering FIRs against journalists to harass and intimidate them. He urged the Supreme Court to issue guidelines on the registration of such FIRs.