Seeking justice on social media should not be promoted: Srinagar Court grants Govt officer interim relief in suit against media outlet

A Srinagar Court recently expressed views against recording government officials without their consent, while they are in the office and performing their duties, opining that the same may amount to a gross violation of fundamental rights and also risk the leakage of confidential public records. .Munsiff Judge Shabir Ahmad Malik made pertinent remarks on the issue while restraining a media outlet, Straight Line News, from publishing any derogatory and defamatory statements/contents/news reports against a government official, Syed Althaf Ahmed (Syed Altaf Ahmad versus Straight Line News (TSL) and others).."No doubt the defandant had his concerns and may be his concerns or grievances were genuine by recording a public servant inside his office where there may be other confidential records/material is not what the defendant should have done. Recording someone on a crowded place is not synonymous with recording someone inside his office while he is discharging his official duties", the Court observed..The Court further opined that bypassing the law to seek justice on social media is not something that should be promoted. In this regard, the order reads:."We must not forget that we live in a welfare society and a welfare society is governed by rules and regulation, there are rules for victims as well as for accused and a proper mechanism is provided for redressal of grievances and voicing concerns before the authorities established by the law. One cannot bypass the law and opt for social media instead of approaching lawful authorities then claim to be a victim. Seeking justice from social media instead of lawful authorities is something that should not be promoted or opted for. Everyone has fundamental right to express his or her views but the same cannot be an exercise at the cost of someone’s right to privacy and that too when his views outrange someone’s reputation and honour. The right to privacy is not absolute neither is the right to freedom of speech and expression both are subject to reasonable restrictions and can be curtailed in accordance with law.".The suit filed by Syed Althaf Ahmed alleged that the media outlet had come to his office to provoke him and malign his image, that the episode was secretly recorded by Straight Line News, edited to portray him in a negative light and uploaded on social media. .The defendants had uploaded the video on their web-portals as well as Facebook/social media without ascertaining the real facts of the case. The online video, in turn, attracted negative comments abuse from social media users who viewed the video, the Court was told. .The Judge acknowledged that the reporter had exercised some restraint and also tried to provide some information regarding public services and grievance cells. .However, the Court added that recording a video without permission or consent and publishing the same on social media, where the person can be subjected to abuses and threats and which may have serious repercussions on his life, liberty, honour, reputation and dignity is a gross violation of fundamental rights, particularly the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the constitution.."The plaintiff’s right to privacy provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be curtailed by recording a video secretly without his knowledge or permission inside a government office when he was performing his duties. The defendants have a their right of freedom of speech and expression. However, same cannot be exercised by violating someone’s privacy and tarnishing his reputation and honour", the Court said..The Judge said that if there were any concerns that required redressal, the ideal approach would be to voice such concerns before the lawful authorities or a court. Judge Malik added, ."It’s apt to mention here that allowing these acts of recording a public servant inside the offices is something that should not be permitted or encouraged as the same may result in leaking/publishing of some confidential public records.".The Court further noted that the full video recording had not been published in the news report by Straight Line News. In this regard, it was observed by the Court that, “It is evident after watching both the videos that the entire video has not been published in the news report, a substantial part of the alleged original video has not been published/shown in the said news report.".The Court also pointed out that the media plays a vital role in framing and moulding society’s opinion. Once a person is declared guilty by the media or the public, a verdict in a court of law or a subsequent acquittal or exoneration is of no consequence, the Judge noted. .As such, stating that the Court is bound to see who suffers the greater hardship which cannot be undone and who would suffer irreparable loss if relief is not granted, interim relief was granted to the plaintiff. .The balance of convenience was in the plaintiff's favour, he had made out a prima facie case and irreparable loss would be caused to him if the relief is not granted, the Court said. .The media outlet has been asked to suspend all existing links to the videos already published online until further orders. However, the Judge has clarified that the defendants are at liberty to publish any news or report after ascertaining the facts with due care and caution. .The case is expected to be taken up next on February 11. .Read the order: