No reason to intervene and stifle free speech: Delhi Court junks Dainik Jagran plea seeking removal of Alt News article

A Delhi Court on Monday rejected an application filed by Dainik Jagran seeking removal of an article published by Alt News, while stating that intervening at an initial stage will result in stifling free speech [M/S Jagran Prakashan Ltd v. M/S Pravda Media Foundation and Ors]. .Civil Judge Chitranshi Arora of the Saket District Court held,"Whether they finally succeed in proving their defense or not is a matter of trial and cannot be determined at this stage. In such a case, where the defense of truth taken by the defendants may stand a chance to succeed at trial, there is no reason for the Court to intervene at such an initial stage and stifle the ever-widening contours of free speech, as developed by the Higher Courts." .Dainik Jagran alleged that Alt News had defamed it by calling its coverage of mass burials in Prayagraj during the second wave of COVID-19 "misleading." The article in question, titled Dainik Jagran’s misleading reports portray mass burials in Prayagaraj haven’t risen due to COVID, was published in May this year.It was contended that the Alt News article carried false, incorrect, disparaging and scandalous statements attributing knowledge and complicity on the part of Dainik Jagran with respect to mass burials in Prayagraj.Further, it was averred that Dainik Jagran's story nowhere contains incorrect facts or findings, and proposed to bring to the notice of the public that the mass burials at the Shringverpur ghat was a regular feature and not only due to COVID deaths.Alleging that Alt News intentionally and repeatedly published defamatory information intending to lower Dainik Jagran's reputation, the latter sought an injunction from the Court to remove the article and to direct Alt News to issue a corrigendum as well as an unconditional apology. .On the other hand, Alt News argued that the prayer of Dainik Jagran is in violation of the freedom of press’ guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India and that the suit is a SLAPP suit (strategic lawsuit against public participation).Further, Alt News claimed that the article was published after extensive research and review of existing media reports, independent ground investigation and on-record conversations with authorities. Moreover, the article did not contain anything which was factually incorrect or share any opinion that was not founded upon factual background, it was contended..After hearing the arguments, the Court noted that extracts from the Alt News article as highlighted by its counsel showed that there was a valid defence of truth and fair comment."Further perusal of the article shows that interviews of priests were taken at the Shringverpur Ghat and Phaphamau bridge to further confirm the contents of the article," the Court stated..The Court held that freedom of speech becomes all the more significant when the subject matter is a matter of larger public concern."In the instant case as well, the impugned article talks about the mass burials in the state of U.P during the horrific second wave of the pandemic Covid-19, which of course, is a concern of and for the masses in India.".In light of the above observations, the Court dismissed the application for injunction, noting in its order,"There is no certainty that defendants defence would fail at trial and there is an equal chance that the defendants may succeed in proving the same. In such circumstances, the plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie case in his favour, since a reasonable and probable defence has been raised by the defendants, which needs determination at trial.".[Read order]