Quashing a criminal defamation case of 2014 against the Editorial Director of Bennett Coleman And Co, publishers of ‘Times of India’ newspaper, the bench of Justice J.B Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan of the Supreme Court cautioned that those working in positions of prominence in media must exercise caution and responsibly publish statements, opinions or news before publication of the same. The bench however emphasized that the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under the constitution is paramount.

The instant criminal defamation case related to the publication of an article in the Times Of India that purportedly suggested that counterfeit artworks were put up for auction by M/s Bid And Hammer Auctioneers Private Ltd. Following this the enterprise then instituted a case of criminal defamation against Jaideep Bose, Editorial, Director Bennett Coleman and Co Ltd and other co-accused Nergish Sunavala, Swati Deshpande and Neelam Raj who worked as either correspondents or editors then.

Aggrieved by a magisterial court’s order that summoned the accused for defamation and Justice NS Sanjay Gowda of Karnataka High Court’s order of 18 June , 2024, of refusing to quash proceedings under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Court the accused carried forth their appeal to the Apex Court.

Setting aside the order of the High Court Justices J.B.Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan stated that, “ the complainant failed to produce any witness to prima facie establish and alleged imputation has lowered their reputation in the estimation of others. In the present case, the auction was conducted on 27-6-14 and the magistrate after merely reviewing the complainant’s statement proceeded to issue summons. Thus, the Magistrate’s order clearly suffers from procedural irregularities… No material has been placed before us to suggest that the auction was unsuccessful or that any damage or loss was actually caused due to the alleged news articles published in the newspapers… examination of witnesses before issuance of summons would serve no useful purpose given remote livelihood of securing witnesses. It only prolonged the litigation yielding little to no benefit especially since the auction has already concluded and more than a decade has passed… We are now inclined to quash the order passed by the High Court as well as issuance of summons by the Magistrate. Consequently, the criminal proceedings initiated against the Appellants are also liable to be quashed’’.

Adding to the above observations, Justice Mahadevan noted , “ Before parting, we find it necessary to emphasize that the right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the constitution is paramount. At the same time, it is reiterated that those working in media, particularly in key positions must exercise utmost caution and responsibility before publishing any statement , news or opinion. The power of the media in shaping public opinion is significant and the press possesses the ability to influence public sentiments and alter perceptions at a remarkable speed’’.

Case Title: Jaideep Bose V. M/S Bid And Hammer Auctioneers Private Ltd.Slp(Crl) No. 10212/2024 And Connected Cases