Back
The has quashed an FIR registered against journalist Sk. Safikul Islam, who operates the YouTube news channel Arambagh TV, over a broadcast concerning alleged irregularities at Kolkata's RG Kar Medical College and Hospital. Justice Anuj Singh held that even if the allegations in the complaint were accepted in their entirety, they did not disclose the of the offences invoked against him under .
The FIR was registered on , at , based on a complaint by Subhashish Chakraborty. The complainant stated that he watched a video broadcast by Islam in which a female voice claimed that the activities of RG Kar Hospital violated rules and regulations. Chakraborty alleged the statement was false and fabricated, and claimed that the broadcast could disrupt peace and harmony and create social unrest.
Court finds no ingredients of offences
Examining the complaint, the court noted that the allegations proceeded entirely on the complainant's belief that the report was false. Justice Anuj Singh observed,
"A belief that a report is false, without any further statement attached thereto, cannot be considered to be an allegation from which an offence under the penal statute can be inferred."
With respect to , which criminalises using a forged document or electronic record as genuine, the court found that the complaint did not allege that any document or electronic record was forged or that the petitioner used any forged document. Similarly, for Section 353(1)(b), which deals with statements intended or likely to cause fear or alarm to the public, the court noted that the complaint did not identify any specific false statement in the video or allege the requisite intent to cause public alarm or induce an offence against the State. The court also found no allegation that the broadcast was intended to promote enmity between communities, as required under Section 353(2). Regarding Section 352, which penalises intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace, the court held that the complaint did not allege that Islam intentionally insulted anyone.
The court concluded:
"The allegations taken on the face of the FIR and taken at its
do not constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused."
It further found that the criminal proceeding was "manifestly attended with
" and appeared to have been instituted with an
to wreak vengeance against the journalist.
withdraws but court independently examines
During the proceedings, the , Subhashish Chakraborty, sought impleadment and stated that he had lodged the complaint under a misunderstanding of facts and no longer wished to pursue the case. The court allowed his impleadment but clarified that the FIR was not quashed merely because of the complainant's withdrawal.
"The present conclusion is entirely on basis of the allegations in the complaint, taken at their
,"
the court said, adding that it expressed no finding on the truth or falsity of the contents of the video or the allegations made against it.
Islam had approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, contending that it was one of several false criminal cases filed against him over the years because his views were perceived as critical of the then State Government. During the pendency of the petition, the investigating officer had frozen a bank account of Islam maintained with , pursuant to an order of the . By an interim order dated , the High Court had stayed further proceedings, restrained the police from taking coercive action, and directed that the bank account be de-frozen.
The investigation remained stayed, and no chargesheet had been filed. Allowing the petition, the High Court quashed the FIR and all proceedings arising from it, and directed that any bail bond furnished by the petitioner in connection with the case stand discharged. The order was transmitted to the jurisdictional magistrate for records and necessary action.
