Rajasthan High Court: In a petition filed by journalist Arnab Goswami, seeking stay and later quashment of FIR registered at Police Station Ambamata, Udaipur, under Section 153-A IPC (promoting enmity between different groups), in response to news concerning the demolition of a temple in Rajgarh, a single-judge bench of Farjand Ali, J., allowed the stay application and directed to not take coercive measures against the petitioner in connection with FIR until the disposal of the main petition.
In the instant matter, the Petitioner was named in FIR registered at Police Station Ambamata, Udaipur, under Section 153-A IPC (Promoting enmity between different groups). The FIR was filed in response to news reporting by Republic Bharat, a Hindi news channel under the Republic Media Network, concerning the demolition of a temple in Rajgarh, Rajasthan. The Petitioner contended that he was neither involved in the editorial decision-making nor had any role in the telecast or debates related to the news reported by Republic Bharat, a Hindi news channel under the Republic Media Network
Court’s Observations & Analysis:
The Court noted the lack of substantive material and stated that the FIR does not include transcripts, video clippings, or evidence demonstrating that the Petitioner personally engaged in speech or conduct inciting enmity. The Court stated that the allegations against the petitioner appear to be speculative and unsubstantiated in the absence of concrete material.
The Court noted that for an offence under Section 153-A IPC, the act must involve words (spoken or written), signs, or visible representation that promote enmity between different groups or disturb public harmony. However, after a careful reading of the FIR, the Court noted that the FIR does not indicate that these essential ingredients are present in the instant matter. The Court stated that FIR did not present any specific statements or acts of the petitioner that incite disharmony.
The Court stated that it is settled law that invocation of Section 153-A IPC requires a deliberate act intended to incite enmity and mere reporting of a public event without inflammatory intent or impact cannot constitute an offence.
“For an offence under Section 153A to be constituted, the alleged words or acts must be clearly intentional, targeted, and capable of inciting disorder or violence. Mere reporting of an event of public interest, devoid of inflammatory intent or impact, cannot be construed as an offence under Section 153A.”
The Court found weightage in petitioner’s argument that the FIR was filed with extraneous motives, aimed at suppressing independent journalism. The Court noted the fact that other media houses aired similar reports but were not subjected to criminal proceedings, thereby raising concerns about the impartiality of the investigation. The Court further stated that the prolonged investigation without conclusive findings indicates that the FIR may be an instrument of harassment rather than a legitimate legal proceeding.
“It appears that the registration of the FIR is aimed at intimidating and silencing independent journalism, which is a fundamental pillar of democracy.”
The Court held that the allegations in the FIR, even if taken at face value, do not disclose the commission of an offence under Section 153-A IPC. The Court allowed the stay application and directed not to take coercive measures against the petitioner in connection with FIR until the disposal of the main petition.
[Arnab Goswami v. State of Rajasthan, 2025 SCC OnLine Raj 436, Decided on 03-03-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani, Sr. Advocate, through VC assisted by Mr. Muktesh Maheshwari and Ms. Vandana Bhansali, Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, Dy.G.A., Counsel for the Respondent
