Gujarat High Court rejects defamation case by 2002 riots victim against ‘Rajdhani Express’ filmmakers for use of photo

The Gujarat High Court recently upheld the dismissal of a defamation case filed by 2002 Gujarat riots victim Kutubuddin Ansari against the makers of the 2013 film ‘Rajdhani Express’ for using his photo in the movie [Kutubuddin Ansari Versus State of Gujarat] .Ansari's photo had become a defining image of the 2002 riots.Justice Sandeep N Bhatt of the High Court said that the courts below “rightly found” that Ansari could not produce any evidence that the accused had used the photograph with the intention to damage his reputation.“The complainant in this case has not produced any clear evidence that the reputation of the complainant has been damaged and such damage has been intentionally caused by the accused persons,” the High Court said.The plea alleged that the movie, by using his picture which was clicked during the riots and published by newspapers, portrayed him in manner that caused great harm to his reputation and endangered his personal safety. He had filed a complaint before a magistrate citing the offences of Section 499 (defamation), 500 (punishment for defamation), 153 read with Section 120-B under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the movie’s director, Ashok Kohli and producer, Manoj Kejriwal. The complaint was dismissed by a magistrate whose decision was then upheld by the Sessions Court..Ansari argued that the publication of the picture in newspapers in 2002 was so traumatising that he had to leave Gujarat and live in Kolkata for three years. He said that the picture was used without his consent in the movie, and that it presented him in a “scandalous background”. He further said he had to relive the traumatising events of the 2002 riots due to such use of the image.His case had earlier been dismissed in 2014 by the Chief Additional Metropolitan Magistrate on the ground that the photographs and video produced by him did not prove that the photograph shown in the film was his and that it had harmed or caused damage to his reputation.In 2019, a City Civil and Sessions Court rejected his revision plea against the magistrate's decision on the ground that he had not provided any evidence regarding any damage to his reputation. The State defended the decision of lower courts before the High Court. .The High Court noted that both the lower courts below had appreciated the material available on record and given concurrent findings in a proper manner.“Since the orders passed by the Courts below are in consonance with the provisions of law, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned orders,” the High Court added before dismissing the appeal..Advocates Gohil and AJ Yagnik represented Ansari. Additional Public Prosecutor Chintan Dave appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]