<p>The Delhi High Court on Saturday awarded Rs 2 crore in damages to a senior Indian Army officer for the loss of reputation suffered by him on account of a 2001 sting operation by news portal Tehelka.com alleging his involvement in corruption in defence procurement. </p>.<p>Acting on a suit filed by Major General M S Ahluwalia, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, ordered Tehelka.com, its owner M/s Buffalo Communications, its proprietor Tarun Tejpal, and two reporters, Aniruddha Bahal and Mathew Samuel, to pay the amount to him.</p>.<p>"There can't be a more blatant case of causing serious harm to the reputation of an honest army officer," the court observed, delivering its order.</p>.<p>It said an apology after 23 years of publication was "not only inadequate but is meaningless".</p>.<p>In his plea, Ahluwalia submitted the sting video that was part of 'Operation West End' to show alleged kickbacks in defence deals and argued that the video, which claimed that he had demanded a bottle of Blue Label whiskey and Rs 10 lakh, ridiculed him and sullied his image, casting aspersions on his character and reputation.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/delhi-hc-quashes-trial-courts-fir-order-against-vhp-leader-over-hate-speech-1239249.html">Delhi HC quashes trial court's FIR order against VHP leader over 'hate speech'</a></strong></p>.<p>It was submitted that Samuel gave an exculpatory statement in the Court of Inquiry vis-a-vis the officer. He admitted neither any money was demanded nor was it paid to the officer. He also accepted that the plaintiff had refused to attend the dinner to be hosted in a five star hotel or accept any other hospitality. The relevant portion of the statement to the effect, “I am only giving you a word of advice as a friend,” has been deleted.</p>.<p>The officer said, "Video news are false, motivated, mischievous and have been made with a view to lower his esteem in the eyes of general public and the viewers/readers of Zee TV and Tehelka.com."</p>.<p>After the telecast, the Court of Inquiry ordered against him had recommended his dismissal of from service. The Chief of Army Staff in his discretion awarded “severe displeasure (Recordable)” against him. </p>.<p>The bench said the plaintiff was a man holding the position of Major General in the Army and was a man of repute. </p>.<p>"The Court of Inquiry gave a clean chit to the plaintiff and severe displeasure was awarded only because of his conduct of agreeing to meet with people of doubtful credentials. It is a service discipline which was questioned and not the integrity or character of the plaintiff," the court noted. </p>.<p>It also rejected a defence that 'Operation West End' was undertaken with public good in mind to expose the rampant corruption in defence procurement, saying, "The aim and objective may have been in public good, but it does not give any right to any agency to create or attribute false statements to the plaintiff merely to create sensationalisation amongst the general public." </p>.<p>"There cannot be worse defamation and disrepute to a person of integrity and honour than a false imputation. There was wide publicity of this transcript which was admittedly put on the website of Tehelka.com, and it continues to remain on their website," the bench said.</p>
<p>The Delhi High Court on Saturday awarded Rs 2 crore in damages to a senior Indian Army officer for the loss of reputation suffered by him on account of a 2001 sting operation by news portal Tehelka.com alleging his involvement in corruption in defence procurement. </p>.<p>Acting on a suit filed by Major General M S Ahluwalia, Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, ordered Tehelka.com, its owner M/s Buffalo Communications, its proprietor Tarun Tejpal, and two reporters, Aniruddha Bahal and Mathew Samuel, to pay the amount to him.</p>.<p>"There can't be a more blatant case of causing serious harm to the reputation of an honest army officer," the court observed, delivering its order.</p>.<p>It said an apology after 23 years of publication was "not only inadequate but is meaningless".</p>.<p>In his plea, Ahluwalia submitted the sting video that was part of 'Operation West End' to show alleged kickbacks in defence deals and argued that the video, which claimed that he had demanded a bottle of Blue Label whiskey and Rs 10 lakh, ridiculed him and sullied his image, casting aspersions on his character and reputation.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/delhi-hc-quashes-trial-courts-fir-order-against-vhp-leader-over-hate-speech-1239249.html">Delhi HC quashes trial court's FIR order against VHP leader over 'hate speech'</a></strong></p>.<p>It was submitted that Samuel gave an exculpatory statement in the Court of Inquiry vis-a-vis the officer. He admitted neither any money was demanded nor was it paid to the officer. He also accepted that the plaintiff had refused to attend the dinner to be hosted in a five star hotel or accept any other hospitality. The relevant portion of the statement to the effect, “I am only giving you a word of advice as a friend,” has been deleted.</p>.<p>The officer said, "Video news are false, motivated, mischievous and have been made with a view to lower his esteem in the eyes of general public and the viewers/readers of Zee TV and Tehelka.com."</p>.<p>After the telecast, the Court of Inquiry ordered against him had recommended his dismissal of from service. The Chief of Army Staff in his discretion awarded “severe displeasure (Recordable)” against him. </p>.<p>The bench said the plaintiff was a man holding the position of Major General in the Army and was a man of repute. </p>.<p>"The Court of Inquiry gave a clean chit to the plaintiff and severe displeasure was awarded only because of his conduct of agreeing to meet with people of doubtful credentials. It is a service discipline which was questioned and not the integrity or character of the plaintiff," the court noted. </p>.<p>It also rejected a defence that 'Operation West End' was undertaken with public good in mind to expose the rampant corruption in defence procurement, saying, "The aim and objective may have been in public good, but it does not give any right to any agency to create or attribute false statements to the plaintiff merely to create sensationalisation amongst the general public." </p>.<p>"There cannot be worse defamation and disrepute to a person of integrity and honour than a false imputation. There was wide publicity of this transcript which was admittedly put on the website of Tehelka.com, and it continues to remain on their website," the bench said.</p>
