J&K Court Orders FIR Against News Channels For Wrongfully Branding Poonch Resident ‘Pakistani Terrorist’
A neighborhood Courtroom in Poonch has directed the police to register an FIR towards editors and anchors of Zee Information, News18, and different unnamed nationwide tv media homes for wrongfully branding a neighborhood trainer as a “Pakistani terrorist” with out verification, following his demise in cross-border shelling after the Pahalgam assault.
The Courtroom noticed that the error can’t be thought of as a “journalistic lapse” as such reporting, in the course of the prevelance of hostilities between India and Pakistan, could cause public mischief and disturb social concord.
“It is very important underscore that whereas freedom of the press is a crucial a part of democracy protected underneath Article 19(1)(a) of the Structure, it’s topic to affordable restriction, underneath Article I9(2) on grounds similar to defamation, public order, decency and morality. Within the current case, the act of branding a deceased civilian trainer of a neighborhood spiritual seminary as a “Pakistani terrorist” with none verification, significantly throughout a interval of Indo-Pak hostilities, can’t be dismissed as a mere journalistic lapse. Such conduct quantities to public mischief and defamation, able to inflicting public outrage, disturbing social harmory, and tarnishing the status of the deceased and the establishment he served,” the Courtroom noticed.
The Courtroom warned that false data spreads rapidly on the web, and there was the next accountability on the media channels to make sure that nice effort is taken to publish data pretty and precisely.
The Courtroom additionally noticed that the next apology revealed by the channels won’t remedy the mischief they brought about.
“The next apology by the information channels doesn’t remedy the mischief already brought about. An apology could have mitigating worth on the stage of sentencing however doesn’t preclude the statutory responsibility of police to register on FIR as soon as a cognizable offence is disclosed.”
The Sub-Choose/Cell Justice of the Peace, Poonch, Shafeeq Ahmed, was acteing on an software filed by Advocate Sheikh Mohd Saleem underneath Part 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, looking for instructions to the Station Home Officer (SHO), Police Station Poonch, for registration of a cognizable case towards the media shops.
In response to the courtroom’s discover, the SHO of Police Station Poonch confirmed that Iqbal had certainly died resulting from Pakistani shelling and that some information networks had initially labelled him a terrorist. These claims have been later retracted, and apologies issued after clarification from native authorities.
Nevertheless, the SHO objected no formal grievance had been lodged by the deceased’s household.
Rejecting the SHO’s objections, the courtroom cited the Supreme Courtroom’s judgment in Lalita Kumari v. Authorities of U.P. 2014, holding that registration of an FIR is obligatory upon disclosure of a cognizable offence, no matter whether or not the complainant is a member of the family or a public-spirited particular person.
The courtroom mentioned that “the applicant, being a neighborhood advocate and citizen, has ample standing to invoke the legislation, significantly the place public curiosity and communal concord are at stake,”
The SHO additionally raised the competition that there was no territorial jurisdiction because the information broadcast originated from Delhi.
The courtroom mentioned that “given the attain of satellite tv for pc media, it’s the place the place defamatory content material is consumed and causes reputational harm that determines the jurisdiction. Accordingly, the objection to territorial jurisdiction is untenable.”
In accordance with the petition, Qari Mohd Iqbal, a trainer at Jamia Zia-ul-Uloom, and a resident of Qazi Mahra, Poonch, was killed in heavy shelling by Pakistan. The information channels, together with Zee Information and News18, aired breaking protection alleging he was a “Pakistani terrorist affiliated with Lashkar-e-Taiba.”
The petitioner argued that the reportage was factually incorrect, unverified, and defamatory, inflicting “irreparable harm” to the deceased’s dignity, misery to his household, and “deep offence to the spiritual sentiments” of the group.
The courtroom directed the Station Home Officer (SHO), Poonch, to file an FIR underneath the next sections:Part 353(2) [Public mischief], Part 356 [Defamation], Part 196(1)[Promoting enmity between religious groups] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Part 66 of the Data Know-how Act, 2000 [Fraudulent act using computer resources].
Case-Title: Sheikh Mohammad Saleem vs UT of J&Okay, 2025
Sheikh Mohammad Saleem complainant in individual.
