Agenda against one political party not journalism: P&H High Court while protecting journalist from police action after complaints by AAP

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday asked Punjab Police not to take any coercive action against Bathinda-based journalist Rattandeep Singh Dhaliwal after multiple police complaints were lodged against him by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLAs.

In a recent podcast, Dhaliwal had said that about 32 sitting MLAs might not be considered as party candidates for the next assembly elections in Punjab.

Subsequently, various MLAs filed police complaints against Dhaliwal, leading to issuance of notice to him by the police of different districts in Punjab.

Justice Rohit Kapoor said it will be impossible for a person to respond to so many notices. The Court reminded the State of the principle that justice should not only be done but also seen to be done.

"It is not they [petitioner] are immune, none of you are but at least some semblance of a proper notice. Within 24 hours, somebody cannot be (appearing) all over the State," the Bench said.

Though the Court did not pass any written direction to protect Dhaliwal from coercive action, it orally asked the State to hold off on taking any action against him until further orders. The Punjab government also gave an assurance to the same effect.

Pertinently, the Court also observed that if a journalist acts with an agenda only against one political party, it cannot be called independent journalism.

"If there is an agenda against only one particular party, then you can't say it is independent journalism. When we say that this is a journalist who wants to put forward certain things in the public domain. 
All of that is very good. But at the same time, everybody, every citizen, be it a a journalist or a lawyer, we are all supposed to be equal before law. So there is no such immunity that anybody enjoys," the Bench said.

However, the Court said Dhaliwal would have to file an additional affidavit to substantiate his claims.

"Ld. Senior Counsel [for petitioner] very fairly submits that he may be granted a short accommodation to file an additional affidavit to substantiate the averments made in the present petition," the Court said in the order.

The matter will be heard next on June 16.

The Court passed the order after Punjab Advocate General Maninderjit Singh Bedi said that the journalist be directed to produce the document relied upon by him to make the claim about AAP candidates.

Bedi also said that Dhaliwal should file an affidavit to affirm that the document was genuine.

Senior Advocate RS Bains, representing Dhaliwal, opposed the submission.

"He is asking for privileged information. You cannot ask a journalist a source just like you cannot ask a lawyer. That is what journalism is all about," Bains said.

Bains said he cannot reveal the source of document.

"That I cannot give... they are targeting journalists. It is last year before elections, as if nobody can speak against them," Bains said.

When Bedi instated that Dhaliwal should place the document before the Court, the Bench said:

"Let him do whatever he wishes to. We will see whatever has to be done."

Dhaliwal in his petition sought quashing of proceedings initiated against him by the police on basis of the complaints made by AAP MLAs.

The journalist alleged that following the recent broadcast, the ruling party instead of choosing to respond with a clarification or denial, asked its MLAs to file complaints against him.

Due to the filing of complaints, Dhaliwal was issued notices by the police in Patiala, Amritsar, Bathinda and Ferozepur asking him to appear before them. He alleged that the police raided his residence despite an offer to cooperate with the investigation.

The intention behind these raids is not investigation but pure intimidation, the petitioner alleged.

As per the plea, Dhaliwal is not an isolated victim but the State of Punjab had a "documented and disturbed history of weaponising criminal law" against journalists.

On Tuesday, the Court had adjourned the matter to watch the controversial podcast.

Today, Justice Kapoor observed that only a small portion of the interview was provided to the Court. Bains, representing Dhaliwal, clarified that only that portion of the video had led to the complaints.

In response to the plea, Advocate General Bedi said Dhaliwal should produce the document in question before the Court and also give an affidavit to the effect that the document was not AI-generated.

The Court remarked that while it would it protect the journalist, every profession carries some responsibility.

"There is a thin line. I am not getting into merits of the matter whether it was some credible source or great journalist but there appears to be some history with this journalist. The question that arises is that there is something called impartial journalism and sometimes anything that is put forward at any particular point of time may have consequences," Justice Kapoor said.

Advocates Loveneet Thakur and Sarabjot Singh Cheema also appeared for Dhaliwal.