Delhi HC stays investigation in criminal case against journalist Vinod Dua till 23 July

The court, in an interim order, said it was of a prima facie view that further proceedings are likely to cause unjustified harassment to the scribe. The court, in an interim order, said it was of a prima facie view that further proceedings are likely to cause unjustified harassment to the scribe.

Journalist Vinod Dua | Twitter

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has stayed the investigation in a criminal case against senior journalist Vinod Dua, for allegedly making statements conducive to public mischief, saying there was an unexplained delay of nearly three months in filing the complaint and lodging of the FIR.

The court, in an interim order, said it was of a prima facie view that further proceedings or probe are likely to cause unjustified harassment to the scribe and stayed the investigation till July 23.

Justice Anup J Bhambhani, who passed the order on Wednesday and made available on Thursday evening, said this court is persuaded to think that the filing of the complaint and lodging of the FIR deserve to be considered and deliberated further, before allowing investigation to proceed against Dua.

“Keeping in view the law as laid-down by the Supreme Court…, without forming an opinion on the merits of this matter, this court is persuaded to think that the filing of the complaint and registration of the FIR deserve to be considered and deliberated further, before allowing investigation to proceed against the petitioner.

“Accordingly, further investigation in the matter arising from the subject FIR is stayed, till the next date of hearing,” the judge said in its 22-page order.

The court also issued notice and sought response of Delhi Police and the complainant, a Delhi BJP leader, on the journalist’s plea seeking quashing of the FIR lodged against him by the Crime Branch.

The FIR was lodged on June 4 on the complaint of BJP spokesperson Naveen Kumar who claimed that “Dua, a known India media personality, committed offence of public nuisance, mischief, printing and engraving matters known to be defamatory, intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace”.

It said that on March 11, Dua on his YouTube show had spoken about riots that started from February 23 in northeast Delhi and the contents of the show were like other national and international news, which highlighted the mishandling of the riots by the police authorities and the central government.

Delhi Police, through advocate Piyush Singhal, and complainant, through advocates Ajay Digpaul and Anil Soni, opposed the interim plea for stay saying investigation is at a nascent stage and the offending narration was merely Dua’s opinion and not based on any fact, and that only rumour has been fostered to create enmity.

The court said there was a substantial unexplained delay in filing of the complaint and lodging of the FIR as the date of alleged offence is March 11 and the complaint was made only on June 3 leading to registration of FIR on June 4, which is a delay of almost 3 months.

The court noted that Dua has already been granted interim protection in anticipatory bail proceedings by a trial court here.

It noted that even after lodging of the FIR, no substantial investigation has been carried-out except for issuance of notice to YouTube and the scribe has not been called to join the probe.

The court said there was no allegation that any adverse consequences, in terms of enmity, hatred or ill-will, muchless any violence or breach of peace, occurred as a consequence of the webcast.

“It prima-facie appears that the lodging of the FIR requires to be examined on the touchstone of the law as laid down in the judicial precedents, since the steps taken so far by the State do not appear to be in consonance with such law and do not inspire much confidence,” it added.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Dua, also sought investigation into the malicious and mala fide activity of the police and an order seeking payment of Rs 1 crore under public law remedy for compensation for violating his fundamental rights.

The petition claimed that the FIR is a proof of the political vendetta and is nothing but an attempt to stifle the independence of free speech.

In his complaint to the Crime Branch, Kumar accused Dua of “spreading fake news” through “The Vinod Dua Show” on YouTube.

Dua was also accused by Kumar of “misreporting” on the Delhi communal violence and stating that the “central government had done nothing to stop the violence”.

Kumar has alleged that Dua had called the prime minister “toothless”.

Dua contended in his plea that the FIR was bogus as it was lodged after 75 days of the alleged incident and it has been maliciously filed against him on false, bogus and stale claim.

However, the offences mentioned are serious and any action taken by the respondent (Delhi Police) would be life threatening, the plea, filed through advocate Varun Singh, said.

It added that he is a senior citizen with co-morbidities like thalassemia minor with iron deficiency, anaemia, hypertension and diabetes.

Dua has blatantly lied or has misinformed his viewers about the series of events. There are also a series of old instances where bizarre and unfounded allegations have been made against the government, police and political leaders. The reporting’s full of false content misleading context…(sic)” Kumar has said in his complaint.

A case has been lodged under IPC sections 290 (punishment for public nuisance in cases not otherwise provided for) and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) and 505(2) (statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes), police said.

Police has lodged FIR for the offences in which the maximum punishment is three years imprisonment.