Supreme Court rejects TV Today's challenge to ₹5 lakh compensation for violating child sexual abuse victim's privacy

The Supreme Court today dismissed a plea filed by TV Today, which operates Aaj Tak, challenging the Delhi High Court's directive that it to pay ₹5 lakhs as compensation for violating the privacy of a child sexual abuse survivor by broadcasting details that exposed her identity [TV Today Network Limited v. ABC].

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana dismissed the plea.

The case concerned an incident from a 2005 incident in which a minor girl lodged an FIR against her father alleging sexual assault.

It was stated that after the child's mother refused to allow Aaj Tak's crew to interview her or her daughter, the channel nevertheless aired a report containing the father's name, designation and workplace, visuals of the family's residential colony and house, and the mother's voice. 

The victim’s mother filed a writ petition against the channel in 2005 and in 2013, a single-judge allowed the plea and awarded damages of ₹5 lakh in favour of the child’s mother.

TV Today challenged the order before the Division Bench of the High Court. One of the arguments raised in the appeal was that the channel, being a private entity, was not subject to the writ jurisdiction of the court. 

On July 1, the Division Bench rejected this argument, holding that even private media companies perform a public function and are subject to the writ jurisdiction of High Courts if they violate the right to privacy of an individual. 

TV Today's counsel today questioned these findings.

"The Court says that we are performing a public function, but it completely ignores the principles which it itself laid down," TV Today's counsel told the Supreme Court.

The Court, however, indicated that it is not inclined to examine such questions of whether the writ petition filed against TV Today before the High Court was maintainable.

"Your prayer for non-maintainability of the writ petition is out of the question," the Court said.

Justice Bagchi added that a media outlet cannot disown the public nature of its functions only when it comes to deciding whether it is liable to pay compensation for an irresponsible broadcast.

"It should come from your (media outlet's) side that you perform a public duty. Tomorrow your bandwidth, your access to the internet, will be stopped. You will come saying that the fundamental right is breached because Article 19(1)(a) of the people is being affected, the press is being throttled. And when you make a publication for which you are irresponsible and constitutional compensation is awarded, you say this is not a public function?" the judge asked.

TV Today's counsel went on to argue that the sexual abuse survivor's mother had since compromised the matter with the father. He added that the ruling against TV Today has serious implications.

TV Today's counsel further cautioned that upholding the High Court's order would "open the floodgates" for similar claims.

"Yes, it should open. We encourage it," replied Justice Bagchi.

The Court proceeded to dismiss TV Today's appeal.

[Read Live Coverage]