The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that India's freedoms will rest safe, as long as journalists can speak to power without being chilled by a threat of reprisal.
"Free citizens cannot exist when the news media is chained to adhere to one position," the top court stressed.
A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and M R Shah said the exercise of journalistic freedom lies at the core of speech and expression protected by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
However, the exercise of that fundamental right is not absolute and is answerable to the legal regime, the bench said.
The court quashed multiple cases, lodged in several states against Republic TV's Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami after his show questioning Congress chief Sonia Gandhi on Palghar killings of Hindu priests on April 16. It termed over 100 FIRs as "an abuse of the process and impermissible", having "a stifling effect on the exercise of freedom".
The bench, however, asked Goswami to approach competent court including the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code with regard to his plea for quashing one FIR transferred from Nagpur to Mumbai, related to the offence of promoting enmity among groups and others, and another FIR registered subsequently with regard to another show related migrant crisis in Mumbai's Bandra. The court extended the protection granted to him for a further three weeks.
The bench explained when the High Court has the power, there was no reason to by-pass the procedure. "This balance has to be drawn between the exercise of a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) and the investigation for an offence under the CrPC," the bench said, acting on writ petitions filed by Goswami.
The court rejected his plea to transfer the probe to the CBI, saying the power to transfer an investigation must be used “sparingly” and only “in exceptional circumstances”.
In its 56-page judgement, the bench decried the practice of subjecting a journalist to multiple complaints in several states.
"This will effectively destroy the freedom of the citizen to know of the affairs of governance in the nation and the right of the journalist to ensure an informed society," the bench said.
"Our (previous) decisions hold that the right of a journalist under Article 19(1)(a) is no higher than the right of the citizen to speak and express. But we must as a society never forget that one cannot exist without the other," the bench added.