Further probe could cause harassment to Vinod Dua: Delhi High Court

"...this court is of the prima facie view that further investigation or proceedings pursuant to the FIR are likely to cause unwarranted and unjustified harassment to the petitioner," said a single judge bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambani.

The court also observed that prima facie, there is no allegation that any adverse consequences, in terms of enmity, hatred or ill-will, much less any violence or breach of peace, occurred as a consequence of Dua's webcast.

The observations came in while the court was hearing a petition filed by the journalist seeking quashing of an FIR registered against him for allegedly "spreading rumours and misinformation regarding the riots. The plea states that the FIR against Dua "smacks of biasedness" and is "mala fide."

Dua, in his plea, has stated that the said FIR registered against him is a proof of "political vendetta" and is nothing but an attempt to stifle free speech "guaranteed to him under Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution of India".

"... it prima facie appears that the registration of the FIR requires to be examined on the touchstone of the law as laid down in the above-referred judicial precedents, since the steps taken so far by the State do not appear to be in consonance with such law and do not inspire much confidence," Justice Bhambhani held.

The court noted that there was an substantial unexplained delay in filing of the complaint and registration of the FIR. "... the date of the alleged offence is 11.03.2020 whereas the complaint came to be made only on 03.06.2020 leading to registration of FIR on 04.06.2020, which is a delay of almost 3 months. Such delay would have required a preliminary enquiry as per the mandate of (the law)," the order read.

The court also observed that, according to the counsel appearing for the state, even after registration of the FIR no substantial investigation has been carried out except for issuance of notice to YouTube, and the petitioner has not been called to join investigation.

During the course of the hearing, counsel appearing for the state and the complainant, sought time to filed their response in connection with the said petition, following which the court has now posted the matter for further hearing on July 23. (IANS)

Also watch: Evening Bulletin | 8th June, 2020