[India Today]

Published date: 28th Feb1982

ONE of the lesser known areas of media responsibility is its relationship with the law. It is a relationship which is generally little understood, not having been explored in India as thoroughly as it has been in other countries. In the United States and Britain, there are countless precedents and judgments which form the collective consciousness of judges and editors. In India, where investigative journalism is in its infancy, the ground is relatively uncharted. Media institutes and law faculties have embarked on preliminary expeditions to feel the terrain, and a few media men have sought to test its contours in bold writing. But more often than not there remains an element of surprise.

This much, at least, INDIA TODAY discovered last fortnight when a typical day at its office was interrupted by a most atypical event : the arrival of a messenger from a local court bearing notices addressed to no fewer than seven parties staying an article that wasn’t even written. The order from the court of Shiv Charan, Sub Judge Ist class, Delhi, restrained INDIA TODAY, the printers Thomson Press and five members of their staff from publishing, printing or circulating any article regarding soft drinks magnate and Congress (I) MP Charanjit Singh. The court passed the order on an application by the MP who alleged that the magazine had set out to “blackmail, harass and to compel the plaintiff to reveal some of the business interests/secrets to the public through the (magazine ) which is wholly illegal, improper and uncalled for”. In his submission Singh then went on to say that “the magazine is adamant in publishing a scandalous, concocted, incorrect, biased and politically motivated article which would seriously damage, defame and harm his reputation”. In support, he offered up the questionnaire sent to him by Correspondent CHAITANYA KALBAG. In which the magazine sought Singh’s cooperation to “help us present a balanced report.” INDIA TODAY will contest the order.

That wasn’t the only encounter with the law last fortnight. In a separate action, INDIA TODAY moved a petition in the Supreme Court concerning fake encounters in Uttar Pradesh which Kalbag investigated last month (January 31, 1982). The petition asked the Court to direct an independent body to investigate the “encounters” with powers to prosecute police officials found guilty of murder or other offences. It also asked the Court to order the state Government to cooperate fully in the investigation and bear its cost. A Supreme Court bench made up of judges V.D. Tulzapurkar, R.S. Pathak and A.N. Sen on February 10 gave the Uttar Pradesh Government two weeks to reply.

AT a less weighty level, INDIA TODAY was in touch with a court of law in a third instance last fortnight when Correspondent ASOKA RAINA obtained permission to interview seven of 31 Indians deported from Lebanon on charges of being mercenaries. Raina had flown to Beirut last October to bring back an exclusive report on the trade in mercenaries to that embattled country. Last month’s deportation gave a vivid glimpse into what is obviously a suspect traffic with strong undercover implications.