Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
Sunil Mathew – Appellant
Versus
The Station House Officer Museum Police Station – Respondent
Crl.MC No. 6319 of 2024
Decided on : 13-09-2024
Bail - Anticipatory Bail - IPC Sections 153, 120B, 506, 384 - The court emphasized the balance between freedom of the press and reasonable restrictions, ruling that conditions imposed on bail must not infringe upon fundamental rights, particularly the right to freedom of expression.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a journalist, challenged a bail condition prohibiting him from airing news about a Bishop's death, which he alleged was suspicious. He faced charges including extortion and was granted anticipatory bail with conditions he contested.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the bail condition restricting the petitioner from expressing his views was unreasonable and tantamount to a gag order, infringing on his freedom of expression as a journalist.
Issues: Whether conditions imposed on anticipatory bail can restrict the freedom of the press and expression.
Ratio Decidendi: Conditions of bail must be reasonable and not infringe upon fundamental rights, particularly the right to freedom of expression, as protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
Result: The court allowed the petition and deleted the unreasonable bail condition restricting the petitioner from broadcasting news related to the Bishop's death.
ORDER :
Petitioner challenges one of the conditions imposed upon him while granting anticipatory bail.
2. The Supreme Head of the Believers Church - Sri. K.P. Yohannan alias Moran Mar Athanasius Yohan Metropolitan is alleged to have died in an accident during a visit to the United States of America. Petitioner who claims to be the Managing Editor of a YouTube news channel called ‘i2i News’ alleges that he, as a professional journalist, obtained information during his investigative journalism that there was foul play behind the death of the Bishop and filed complaints before the State Police Chief with all good faith. A petition dated 28-05-2024 has been submitted by the petitioner before the State Police Chief.
3. In the meantime, a complaint was filed by another Bishop of the Believers Church, alleging that on 09-05-2024 and 21-05-2024, the second accused had aired false news through his news channel - the first accused , stating that the death of the Bishop was not accidental but was the result of a planned murder. It was also alleged that the third accused demanded advertisements on the news channel failing which the accused threatened the Church of publishing such false news which would have a tendency to create division among the Church members.
4. Based on the above complaint dated 24-05-2024, FIR No.752 of 2024 of Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, was registered on 29-05 2024 alleging offences under sections 153, 120B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Section 120(o) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 with the news channel as the first accused, petitioner as the second accused and a marketing executive of the channel as the third accused. Later, section 384 IPC was also added and hence petitioner sought protection from arrest. While granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, the learned Sessions Judge imposed the condition that he shall not air any news related to the death of Sri. K.P.Yohannan until his petition before the State Police Chief is disposed off. The said condition is challenged in this petition under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. I have heard Sri. Sooraj Thomas Elanjickal, the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. Concededly, petitioner is a journalist operating a news channel by name ‘i2i News’. He is alleged to have published news relating to the death of the Bishop of Believers Church portraying it to be a murder and not an accidental death. Petitioner has already filed complaints before the State Police Chief to investigate into the allegation. The information allegedly collected by him is stated to have been published through his news channel on two different days. The only non-bailable offence alleged against the accused is under section 384 IPC. The learned Sessions Judge felt it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner but imposed conditions which included a restraint on publishing any news relating to the death of the said Bishop.
7. The question raised relates to the freedom of the press vis-a-vis conditions that can be imposed in a bail order. While penning this judgment, this Court is reminded of the words of Nobel Laureate Albert Camus that “A free press can, of course, be both good and bad, but, most certainly, without freedom, the press will never be anything but bad”. Freedom of the press is a prerogative that no country can ill afford to renounce. However much people may hate a free press, its absence leads to curtailment of democratic rights and even liberty. The absence of a free press has been said to be the absence of democracy. The said freedom is however not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions. Restrictions can be imposed in the exercise of such freedom in appropriate circumstances. The question that needs resolution here is whether such restrictions can be imposed as part of the conditions of bail.
8. Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitione
Bail conditions must respect fundamental rights and cannot impose unreasonable restrictions on freedom of expression.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of protecting the freedom of the press and journalists' ability to carry out their journalistic endeavors.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the assessment of hate speech allegations, the responsibility of the media, and the right to free speech under the Constitution of India.
The necessity of custodial interrogation alone is insufficient for granting anticipatory bail; courts must consider the prima facie case and seriousness of allegations.
The judgment emphasizes the need for a thorough and fair investigation in cases of alleged offences and highlights the distinction between free speech and hate speech in the context of the penal law.
Bail is rule, not exception, in non-bailable offences without death/life imprisonment bar post charge-sheet; parity with co-accused; influential status mitigated by conditions preventing tampering; p....
Granting anticipatory bail based on unconditional apologies and undertakings not to conduct similar activities in the future.
The seriousness of the allegations, particularly the act of removing the turban of the elderly person and uploading the video, influenced the court's decision to refuse anticipatory bail.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
