The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal defamation proceedings filed by advocate Vikram Singh Chauhan against journalist Arnab Goswami and senior directors of Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. (BCCL), arising from a 2016 Times Now broadcast on violence at the Patiala House Court.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that the complaint and evidence did not disclose any offence under Sections 499–500 IPC. The Court observed that a company, being a juristic entity, cannot possess the mens rea necessary to commit defamation, and therefore BCCL itself could not be prosecuted. It further ruled that the company’s Managing Directors and Whole-time Directors could not be held vicariously liable in the absence of specific allegations establishing their personal involvement in the telecast. General assertions of “active connivance” were found insufficient.
Regarding Arnab Goswami, the Court held that the terms “gunda”, “hooligan”, and “rogue lawyers” used during the debate were contextual descriptions of publicly documented violent incidents at Patiala House Court. The broadcast was an exercise of journalistic commentary on a matter of public concern, and there was no material showing false or malicious intent to harm the complainant’s reputation. The expressions, though strong, did not amount to imputations on character as required under Explanation 4 to Section 499 IPC.
Finding continuation of proceedings an abuse of process under the principles laid down in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335, the Court quashed the summoning order dated 28 February 2018 and all consequential proceedings.
Appearances:
Petitioner: Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aman Avinav, Mr. Kumar Rishabh Parth, and Mr. Shailendra Slaria, Advocates.
Respondent (2): Mr. Shoaib Haider, Ld. APP for State. Mr. Sahil Chopra, Mr. Mukesh R. Yadav and Mr. Yash Tewari, Advocates with R-2 in person.
