Do you want bifurcated seating? Supreme Court to journalist who called out man who harassed her on flight

The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed an appeal filed by a journalist challenging a Delhi High Court direction to her to remove a social media post in which she had shared a man’s photograph and workplace details and accused him of sexual harassment on a flight [Khansa Juned v. Nidish Gopalkrishnan Nair].A Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan said it was not inclined to interfere with the High Court order.“We are not interfering with the impugned order. The special leave petition is, hence, dismissed,” the Court said.The Bench expressed concern about allegations being made on social media without considering the consequences, noting that the man (accused) had lost his job following the posts.The Court further went on to make broader remarks on such incidents, saying that if such allegations continue, separate seating arrangements for men and women may have to be considered in public places like cinema and marriage halls. “In cinema theatres also, we will now have separate seats for women and men...In marriage halls, all women on one side and all men on another... What is this? If such allegations are to be made, do you want bifurcation? We will order that as a guideline so there are no perpetrators,” the Court said after dictating the order..The incident dates back to March 11 when the journalist accused a fellow passenger of inappropriate conduct on a Delhi -Mumbai flight. She later posted the allegation on X along with his photograph and workplace details.The man denied the allegations and approached the Delhi High Court with a defamation suit, following which an injunction order was passed against the journalist and media houses.On April 2, a Division Bench of the High Court upheld the interim order directing the journalist to take down the post on X and restraining her from publishing similar allegations until the next date of hearing.The journalist challenged this order before the Supreme Court..Appearing for the journalist before the Supreme Court, Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai argued that his client was a 24-year-old victim of sexual violence.“Perpetrators rush to the High Court and manage to get an interim stay restraining her. There is a restraint on me from speaking about the incident. Please see how the High Court deals with it,” Dehadrai submitted.However, Justice Nagarathna questioned the decision to publish the allegations on social media and stressed the importance of the right to reputation.“You went to social media for this? Don’t go spreading it everywhere. You are trying to say someone is a perpetrator and putting it on social media. You are supposed to be the victim. Somebody sees it, and he is suspended from his job. Look at the consequences. Therefore, he says this is defamatory. You should not go and defame anybody like this. He has filed a suit for defamation. There is a right to reputation,” the judge observed.At this point, Dehadrai argued that the competing interest was his client’s right to free speech.“You get the suit dismissed,” Justice Nagarathna responded.Dehadrai further told the Court that an FIR had already been lodged in the matter.“My Lords, in Bloomberg.... this Court laid down the Bonnard principle. It should either be malicious or palpably false,” he submitted.The Court, however, reiterated that it was not inclined to interfere with the High Court’s order and dismissed the plea..[Read Live Coverage]