Channel editors to ensure proper editorial control so that investigation is not hampered: Delhi High Court in Disha Ravi plea on toolkit FIR leak

The Delhi High Court today directed news channel editors to exercise proper control while reporting so that the investigation into the farmers protests toolkit, in which arrested climate change activist Disha Ravi is implicated, is not hampered..The Court also directed Ravi to ensure that the people connected to her do not indulge in scandalising the Delhi Police during the course of the investigation into the case. .The Bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh passed an interim order directing the following:Delhi Police will strictly abide by affidavit filed today, wherein it has stated that it has not leaked anything to the media and that it does not intend to do so. The Office Memorandum of April 1, 2010 concerning press briefings to the media, would also have to be complied with. Delhi Police would be able to conduct press briefings in accordance with the law;Media shall ensure that telecasts are from verified and authentic sources, though sources are not being asked to be revealed at present. The editorial teams shall ensure that only such broadcasts are disseminated which has verified content. The channel editors are to ensure proper editorial control so that the investigation is not hampered, in any manner;Once the charge sheet is filed, its coverage would not be interdicted in any manner;The petitioner is to ensure people connected to her do no indulge in unnecessary/scandalising messages. This would ensure that the parties do not go on a maligning course during the investigation. The Court also took note of the submission for the petitioner that no such content has been put out by the petitioner or persons connected. to her, and that they have no intention to do so. The question of removal of content already online would be considered at a later stage. .The Court was of the opinion that the matter requires a detailed hearing, as a large number of respondents did not have the opportunity to peruse the material in question. It further noted in its order,"There is no doubt that the regulation of content has been a very contested issue across the world. India is no exception...While journalists cannot be asked to reveal sources, they need to ensure that the source ought to be authentic and a verifiable source... ".The Court added, "The media plays a very important role in ensuring there is no sensationalisation and that they indulge in responsible journalism. Recent coverage by the media definitely shows there is prejudicial and sensational journalism which is being undertaken by the media houses.".Justice Singh further noted that the need of the hour was to strike a balance."In order to ensure that all three aspects of petitioner's privacy/dignity, sovereignty/integrity and free speech are equally protected and balanced, right of the individual has to be balanced with the right of public," the Court said..The matter will be next heard on March 17..Appearing for Ravi today, Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal contended that the FIR lodged on February 4 does not mention the name of his client. He added that when she was arrested, no information was given to her family on whether production is going to happen. However, the media was present at the place of production in large numbers..Sibal then told the Court that Times Now reported that Ravi "broke down in court and said she edited only two lines". On the same day, Sibal added, Delhi Police put out a tweet saying that Ravi did more that editing two lines, that she collaborated with a Khalistani organisation, and that she shared the toolkit with Greta Thunberg.He accused the Delhi Police of making its case through its Twitter handle..Thereafter, Sibal continued, a press briefing was held, following which the media began discussing WhatsApp chats allegedly sent by Ravi. The media had attributed this news to police sources, he said.Referring to a News18 report, he said that the person reporting in Hindi goes into detail on what questions were asked by the police, and what answers were given. The media also reported that Disha Ravi also coaxed Greta Thunberg into speaking on the case, Sibal informed the Court..When the Court asked Sibal if he was alleging that Delhi Police was responsible for leaks to the media, he said,"They have in fact leaked, that is the only logical inference. The person broadcasting says I have got it from police forces. This is happening while I am being produced before the Magistrate."He went on to refer to an India Today report with inbuilt commentary and inferences on the case..Sibal then referred to a Central government circular advising police against press briefings in ongoing cases. In this circular, it was mentioned that such briefings should take place only at the stages of registration, arrest of accused, and chargesheeting, and should only be confined to the facts of the incident..Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for Delhi Police urged the Court to adjourn the matter till Monday, assuring that no press conference would be held till then..Justice Singh then raised a query on media attributing leaks to police sources, while acknowledging that a journalist may not divulge sources. Raju replied,"What media says may not be gospel truth. To hide his source, (media) may say it is the police...There are several persons interrogating, somebody may leak it. There may be ten persons interrogating, a peon may leak..."He added,"We don't intend to do anything that is illegal. Leaking is illegal.".Raju then pointed out that there were certain statements made to malign the police."If we counter that and we hold a press conference, there cannot be any violation of guidelines." He added that the bar on leaking should be applicable to both sides..The ASG further contended that the writ petition has been filed to put pressure on and malign the police, and to hamper the investigation..Advocate Nisha Bhambhani, appearing for News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA), stated that no complaint was received by the NBSA and if any complaints had been received, NBSA would have taken action..When counsel for News18, advocate Mrinal Bharti sought some time to file a reply, the Court observed,"There is no doubt that the video is very, very sensational.".Advocate Hrishikesh Baruah, appearing for India Today, said that the article in question was not a news broadcast at all. "This is only digital news online article...therefore Cable TV Network Act, programme code has no application...".The Court noted that the issue raised is the WhatsApp messages being attributed to Ravi by these news channels. On this point, Raju contended,"If you reveal WhatsApp chats at the stage of charge sheet, there is no violation of privacy. It is in favour of ensuring investigation that it is not revealed at this stage (before chargesheet).".Sibal countered,"There is a difference between the public record and the public domain. Merely saying that 'something is wrongfully disseminated in public domain so I must not be restrained from disseminating it further' is wrong."He went on to say,"How do we stop this? They say they haven't leaked, media says we got it from the police... they must not disclose anything from the casefile which is not part of public record. That's the only what to stop it.".ASG Chetan Sharma appeared for Central Government authorities to submit that the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has constituted an inter-ministerial committee to look into complaints regarding television broadcasting. He pointed out that no complaint has been received so far over any private channel broadcast disseminating the WhatsApp messages. He added that the petition is premature. .Advocate Kunal Tandon appeared for Times Now, and contended that all the broadcasts were made were on the basis on material available in the public domain. .After taking the submissions of the parties on record, the Court proceeded to pass its interim order..Ravi had moved Delhi High Court seeking a direction to the Delhi Police to not leak any material to media in relation to the toolkit FIR..She had also prayed for a direction to the Central government to take appropriate action against News18, India Today, Times Now and all other satellite TV channels under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 for compromising her fair trial rights and privacy by reporting on details of the FIR..Such conduct, it was asserted, goes against her presumption of innocence, and violates her right to fair trial, thereby affecting the administration of justice..The Court had issued notice the NBSA and the news channel in the matter on February 18. During this hearing, SG Mehta claimed that the Delhi Police was not responsible for the leak of the FIR..Ravi was apprehended by the Delhi Police during the night of February 13, on the allegation that she had made edits to a Google document that was shared as a “toolkit” related to the ongoing farmers protests..The toolkit was the basis for the case registered by Delhi Police after Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg had tweeted the same, expressing support for the farmers protests..The Delhi Police claimed that the “toolkit” itself was created by a Khalistani group, Poetic Justice Foundation and was edited by Disha Ravi. It was Ravi who shared the same with Thunberg, the police alleged..The police custody of Ravi, who was remanded for five days by the Patiala House Court, expires today. She was earlier allowed a copy of the FIR, as well as access to warm clothes and books..She has now been sent to judicial custody for three days..Read the order: