The Delhi High Court on Monday rejected a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking directions to block an article published by The Print regarding Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) shutting its North America operations.A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said that the article, prima facie, does not compromise the careers of the officers or put the lives of their family members in any danger."Freedoof press is placed at a very high pedestal. We cannot order it (article) to be removed like this," the Court underlined.The government has enough powers to deal with the issue if it considers necessary, the Court added while rejecting the pleaThe Print had carried a story titled “Nijjar-Pannun effect: RAW downs shutters in North America 1st time since inception in 1968” on November 30, 2023. The article was authored by Praveen Swami, Contributing Editor to The Print.The PIL before the High Court was filed by advocate Raghav Awasthi stating that as per the information he received from someone who works at Indian High Commission, the article puts the life of Indian diplomats and intelligence workers in danger.Through the PIL, Awasthi also sought a direction to stop media houses from publishing source based speculations on whether any government official or diplomat working abroad is working for the intelligence services.He said that The Print's article was totally source based and damaging to the careers of the Indian diplomats and put their lives at risk.Awasthi added that he is ready to submit in sealed cover the identity of the diplomat who approached him.He also said that the Court proceedings may be conducted in-camera to protect the identity of the officials.The Court, however, rejected the contentions saying that it cannot order blocking of a news report like this.It said that the article, prima facie, does not compromise the careers of the officers or put the lives of their family members in any danger.The Bench added that by discussing the issue in Court, it was Awasthi who was risking the identity of the intelligence officials."It is an innocuous piece. Leave it at that. It does not identify anyone. I think you [Awasthi] have identified more people than that. Your source is correct or not, we have no idea," the Bench remarked.The Court further said that the Government of India has enough powers to deal with the issue and if the government thinks something is a risk to national security, they are free to act on it.The Court ultimately concluded that the PIL was based on "surmises and conjectures" which are in turn based on hearsay.Therefore, it dismissed the plea.
"Government of India has full power and authority to block any article which compromises national safety and security and it requires no advise of either the petitioner or this court... The Court should not easily transgress into this area. The impugned article, in the opinion of this court, prima facie, does not compromise the careers of the officers or puts the life of their family members in any danger," the Court concluded in its order.
TAGS: Delhi High Court PIL The Print article Research and Analysis Wing RAW North America operations freedom of press government powers
