Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

WHAT IS THE PIL ABOUT?

A PIL has been moved before the SC by a Lawyer Ghanshyam Upadhyay seeking directions to prevent penal action against journalists, based on any publication, airing of views, or telecast. The plea contends that when Zee News & Republic TV had posed "important" questions and relevant news vis-à-vis the responsibility of Tablighi Jamaat for spreading Coronavirus and silence of the Congress President Sonia Gandhi on the Palghar Mob Lynching, "certain disgruntled elements with a view to silence them" lodged FIRs against them in different states across the country. 

Adv. Upadhyay seeks protection of the fundamental rights of the press, electronic media and print media as envisaged under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution by the issuance of directions to lodge FIRs against the press and media unless sanction for registration of such FIRs/prosecution has been granted by the Press Council of India and/or any judicial authority nominated by Court. In terms mentioned above, the plea calls for framing of guidelines for purposes of registration of FIRs against journalists for casting news or debates.

CONCLUSION:

The plea stated, "These news channels as a matter of fact performed their duties as responsible media which did not violate any law for the time being in force. On the contrary, these two channels which are being targeted now by a certain section of people and political parties by telecasting such programmes performed their professional responsibility and duty toward the country and its people and responsibility of journalism."

 The plea further stated, "To effectively exercise the right of free speech and expression and for forming opinion it is necessary to have an impartial journalist in the country who can perform their duty without fear."

To exemplify the PIL mentioned above, the plea goes on to mention the recent cases filed against Arnab Goswami & Sudhir Chaudhary, which are alleged to be "false, frivolous, vexatious and malicious prosecution" by the petitioner. Furthermore, it is contended that as the petitioner is an alert citizen of the country, it is imperative that "anti-national" elements do not engage in tactics to destabilize or destroy the country.

"Loved reading this piece by Tirtharaj Basu?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"




Tags :

  Views  45  Report



Comments
img