Arnab Goswami defamed businessman Aneel Mussarat by referring to him as ISI stooge: British Court

A British Court last week held that Arnab Goswami defamed businessman Aneel Mussarat during a programme aired in July 2020 in which he referred to Mussarat as an "ISI stooge" [Mussarat v Worldview Media Network Ltd]..The case was decided by Deputy Master Toogood QC of the Royal Courts of Justice in London, who recorded his satisfaction that Mussarat’s claims were neither extravagant nor unreal, since the programme contained serious allegations against him after he was identified by both his image and his name.“The Claimant is therefore entitled to default judgment for libel for damages to be assessed,” it was recorded..The Court, on receiving no response from Goswami, continued to make the judgment in his absence, noting that he had proper notice of the application and the hearing. The judge stated,“There is nothing before me to suggest that I ought to adjourn this hearing or that it would be unfair to proceed in the Defendant’s absence.”.The judgment records further instances of the alleged defamatory statements made during the programme wherein Mussarat’s photo was shown to coincide with an interviewee who stated,“I don’t think freedom of expression extends to fraternising with people who are clearly involved in sending terrorists across into India.”Additionally, photographs of the claimant were also displayed next to the captions: “Should Bollywood declare any links to pro-Pakistan, pro-terror, anti-India individuals and groups?” and “Should Bollywood renounce any links with Pakistanis who take a pro-terrorist line?”.On finding that libel was committed, the Court went on to examine the relief sought. It was noted that Mussarat was entitled to an award substantially in excess of the £10,000 permissible under the statute.Referring to a previous decision in which the claimant was awarded £60,000 for a broadcast alleging the involvement of Sikhs in terrorism, the Court observed, “The authorities have always been unanimous that any allegation of terrorism is to be regarded as extremely serious and highly damaging, and that has been recognised in awards of general damages well into six figures.”However, the maximum sum of £10,000 permissible pursuant to the summary procedure was awarded on Mussarat’s submission that the making of the award was more important to him than the actual sum..The Court also granted a declaration that the allegations made against Mussarat by Goswami in the meaning set out in the claim were false and defamatory.“Although I make my decision based on the Claimant’s evidence alone, I note that the programme contained no evidence whatsoever to support its assertions that the Claimant was engaged in anti-India activities including assisting in terrorism against India and the other matters set out in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Particulars of Claim.”.Mussarat was also held to be entitled to his costs of this action, which were summarily assessed at £37,500.William McCormick QC appeared for Mussarat, while Goswami was not represented..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.