Arnab's bail welcome; but let the buck not stop here

Indeed, November 11, 2020, will go down in the legal history of India as the red letter day. It is on this day that a division bench of the Supreme Court of India comprising Justice D.Y.Chandrachud and Justice Indira Banerjee devoted the whole day on the Special Leave Petition filed against dismissal of the Criminal Appeals by Bombay High Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami against the State of Maharashtra and Others.

The Apex Court heard the elaborate arguments of both sides centering around the Articles 14,19 and 32 of the Constitution of India and Sec. 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). While the the said Articles relate to the fundamental rights including Freedom of Expression, the latter deals with the offence of abetment to suicide.

The petitioner Arnab Goswami, the editor-in-chief of Republic TV who enjoys considerable clout in journalistic as well as political lobbies was the subject matter of the case. He was arrested by the Maharashtra Police in a dramatic manner allegedly in blatant violation of the law and procedure and taken to Alibaugh make-shift jail initially and thereafter shifted to the Taloja jail. Thus, the ace journalist suffered a total of 8 days' imprisonment since the hearing of his petition by the Supreme Court.

Prior to reaching the crescendo, the legal power play was played in full swing at the lower court as well as at the Bombay High Court . A battery of high-profile lawyers from both sides was pressed in service. The apex court after hearing the day long arguments from both the sides, finally granted interim bail to the journalist and others against the execution of personal bond for Rs.50,000 each.

By the time the order was pronounced, it was past 4 in the evening. Still the bail order was executed on the same day at jet speed and the accused journalist was out of prison at around 9 p.m ; which reminds one of the bail of actor Salman Khan.

While the judgment in this SLP has been reserved by the apex court, going by the intermittent responses of the court during the deliberations, it can be reasonably expected that the judgment would be a 'remarkable' piece of judicial pronouncement and it will go into the annals of legal history as one of the most referred judgment on the Freedom of Expression and abetment to suicide.

True, this singular incident would mark the resilience of the human rights of our countrymen; but what doesn't auger well is the element of selectivity prevailing in the judicial exercise. Ever since Independence when the new era of democracy and freedom began, it is unfortunate that our system has not lived up to the dreams of Mahatma Gandhi who advocated that the fruits of freedom should reach the man in the street.

It is regrettable that over all these years nothing has changed. The politicians and mighty police force go berserk over the meek and mild who do not have resources, both physical and financial to question the perpetrators of injustice to them. As a result, taking advantage of ambiguous and archaic laws and its procedure most of the offenders go scot-free.

In other words, while the unprivileged and un-influential victims of police accesses either suffer silently or succumb to the brutalities, the influential and powerful persons who are seldom targetted get swiftly their legal dues on platter even in rare cases of their arrest due to a variety of reasons including the political vendetta.. Certainly, such a situation needs to be remedied at the earliest.

Hawk Eye On Media

Obviously in a bid to 'discipline' the wayward digital and audio visual media, the government has amended the Government of India (Allocation of Business) Three Hundred and Fifty Seventh Amendment Rules, 2020 on November 9.

According to a notification issued by the office of the President of India, after entry 22 in the above mentioned Rules, two entries namely, 22 A and 22 B have been added to include films and audio visual programs made available by online content providers; and news and current affairs content on online platforms respectively.

The amendment which comes into force at once will enable the government to exercise vigilance on hitherto uncontrolled digital platforms. Indeed, if the amended law is used judicially and without malice or prejudice, it can usher into ' Swatcch Digital Bharat'.

UAE Decriminalises Attempt To Suicide

In a slur of amendments to various personal, succession and criminal laws, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), has decriminalised the offences such as attempt to suicide, alcohol consumption, cohabitation of unmarried couples etc. Further, the 'Honour Crimes'- where male relative can get a lighter sentence for assaulting a female relative under the guise of protecting honour will be treated as a crime similar to any other assault.

By a decree, the UAE President, Shaikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan also approved amendments to the laws dealing with divorce, separation and succession. In a major shift, the couples married in their home country, but applying for divorce in the UAE, the laws of the country where the marriage took place will apply.

Comedian's Error!!

Kunal Kamra a stand-up comedian who made a series of tweets regarding the Supreme Court in the wake of the latter granting interim bail to Arnab Goswami has landed in soup.

A law student, Skand Bajpai in his letter to Mr. K.K.Venugopal, Attorney General of India had requested his consent for initiation of contempt proceedings against Kunal Kamra. The Attorney General has given his consent to prosecute the comedian under the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.

The law student had brought to the notice of the Attorney General that the tweets and publications by Kamra scandalise the Supreme Court and prejudices the minds of millions of people. Contending that the comedian's Twitter handle has 1.7 million followers and if this kind of unruly and irresponsible statements against the judges are allowed to go unchecked, it would shake the confidence of the people in judiciary and requested the initiation of proceedings against Kamra u/s 15(1b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Rule 3 of the Rules to Regulate Proceedings for Contempt of the Supreme Court, 1975.

Agreeing with Skand Bajpai, the Attorney General cautioned the people like Kamra and said, "It is time people understand that attacking Supreme Court unjustifiedly will attract punishment."

Courts' Working In Telangana

The High Court and subordinate courts in Telangana shall continue to work in a limited manner both by virtual and physical mode up to December 31, it has been announced officially. The notification issued by the high court says that if the case papers are filed in physical form, now onwards they will not be kept for sanitisation for 48 hours.

Each court will list only 20 cases daily for hearing pertaining to the urgent matters specified in the notification and no adverse orders will be passed for the non-appearance of a party or his Counsel. EOM