Allahabad High Court (in inset: Al Jazeera)
On June 14, the Allahabad High Court granted an interim stay against the Al Jazeera Media Network Private Limited from telecasting, broadcasting or releasing the film “India… Who lit the Fuse?” Al Jazeera is a news channel based in Doha, Qatar.
The court said, “Considering the evil consequences that are likely to occur on the telecast/broadcast of film in question its telecast/broadcast we are of the view that the broadcast/telecast of the film in question be deferred pending consideration of the cause in the present petition.” The court has listed the case for hearing on July 6, 2023.
The court has directed the Government of India and relevant authorities that the contentious film is not allowed to be telecasted unless its contents are examined by the appropriate authorities and it has received certification from a competent authority. The court has further directed the Government of India and the State Government to act in aid of the court’s directions and secure “social harmony and protect the security and interest of the Indian State.”
The petitioner contends that the movie has the potential to cause disharmony amongst citizens and threaten the integrity of the nation. The petitioner argues that the movie, if released, would create hatred amongst different religious denominations and destroy the secular fabric of India. Furthermore, it is argued that the movie has the potential to create social unrest and disturb public order, decency and morality.
The petitioner has also argued that while Al Jazeera is a news organisation, it has exceeded its ambit to broadcast movies and positions as investigations on its channel “with the singular intention of creating distress and endangering public order in the country.”
The petitioner submits that he has learned from print and social media reports that the movie “portrays Muslim minority of living with a sense of fear and presents a disruptive narrative creating a sense of public hatred, which is far from reality.” The petitioner further submits that the movie negatively portrays the political functionaries of the state and projects them as acting detrimental to the interests of minorities. The petitioner also submits that the movie “purposefully seeks to create a rift between India’s largest religious communities through its disruptive narrative and create a sense of public hatred.” The petitioner argues that the movie proposes to publicise distorted versions of facts with the intent to create disharmony amongst the citizens, who belong to different religious denominations.
The court noted, “In para 27 of the writ petition instances are enumerated to show that Al Jazeera acted in a partisan manner in the past and has been banned by several nations. It was banned for five days in 2015 in India for publishing vexatious and misleading information about the political map of India, showing integral parts of India to be parts of China and Pakistan.” The court adds, “The fifth respondent has also been penalized with imposition of costs of ten lacs by Delhi High Court on 13.2.2023 for divulging the identity of a rape victim.”
The petitioner submits that while Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees the fundamental right of freedom to speech and expression, the same is subject to reasonable restriction under Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India. Notably, the right to freedom of speech and expression can be restricted in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, Public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of Court, defamation or incitement to an offence.
The court said, “We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have examined the records of the present case. The petitioner has made serious allegations in the writ petition about the Film in question to be based on distorted facts with a view to disrupt the social and communal harmony in world’s largest democracy, which is founded on the principle of just social order.”
The court further said, “The petitioner also alleges that the fifth respondent is about to release/broadcast/telecast the Film in question without obtaining required certificate from the competent statutory authority with an intent to overreach the constitutional safeguards for placing reasonable restrictions on the right of speech and expression.”
The court noted, “The apprehension expressed by the petitioner is that the telecast of film in question without adhering to the constitutional and statutory safeguards may result in injuring the public order and thereby the sovereignty and integrity of India.” The court has said that on perusal of the constitutional scheme, the apprehensions cannot be termed baseless or ill-founded. The court further said, “We are conscious of the fact that the freedom of speech and expression as also the right of broadcast is a fundamental right but it remains subject to the reasonable restrictions imposed by Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India.”
Leave a Comment