Bangalore District Court
Sri. J.T.Patil vs Focus T.V. Kannada on 9 March, 2023
IN THE COURT OF XLII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-43)
Present: Sri. Kengabalaiah,
B.Com., LL.B.
XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge.
Dated this 9 th Day of March, 2023
O.S.No. 3465/2018
Plaintiff/s : Sri. J.T.Patil
S/o Late Thimmanagouda Patil
Aged about 67 years,
Occupation : Agriculturist
And presently Member of
Karnataka Legislative Assembly
R/at Yadahalli, Bilagi Taluka
Bagalkot District.
Also R/at : Room Nos.531 & 532
Legislators' Home [LH-2]
Ambedkar Veedhi,
Bangalore - 560001.
[By Sri. S.R. Dodawad, Adv.]
-Vs-
Defendant/s : Focus T.V. Kannada
TV News Channel &
Youtube Channel
New BEL Road, RMV 2nd Stage,
Opp. to Devasandra Bus Stop,
Bangalore - 560094
[Exparte]
Date of institution of the suit 15.05.2018
Nature of the suit Permanent injunction
Date of commencement of 27.8.2021
recording the evidence
2 OS.No.3465/2018
Date on which the judgment 09.3.2023
was pronounced
Total duration Years Months Days
04 09 22
(Kengabalaiah),
XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge.
*********
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendant for permanent injunction.
2. The case of the plaintiff is that, the Plaintiff is a Science Graduate and an agriculturist by occupation, has been in the public life since more than 4 decades. The Plaintiff, with his public spirited personality hard work, honesty, integrity and commitment to the public cause, has carved out a niche in the mind of public at large in general and in the Bilagi-22 the Legislative Constituency in Bagalkot District. The family of the Plaintiff since several decades has been in public life. The ancestors of the Plaintiff had actively participated in the Indian Freedom Movement and the family has been associated with the Indian National Congress party which is a recognized National Political Party by the office of the Election Commission of India. The Plaintiff was elected as 3 OS.No.3465/2018 a MLA from Bilagi Constituency Bagalkot District during the period between 1994-1999 and 1999-2004, twice and consecutively having been fielded as a Congress candidate. In 2004 Assembly Elections and in 2009 Parliamentary Elections the Plaintiff was defeated. In the 2013 General Elections to State Legislative Assembly, the Congress party fielded the Plaintiff again as it's Official Candidate and he emerged victorious defeating his nearest rival Murugesh R.Nirani, fielded by Bharatiya Janata Party. Though, Congress party has proved its credentials for several decades, there have been efforts from multiple quarters to tarnish the image of the Party and its staunch workers including its elected representatives. The Plaintiff who has been a humble worker of the Indian National Congress Party and by his enormous hard work and unchallenged and unparalleled integrity he has earned a very special place in the heart of the people in general and the voters of his Constituency. But, political/ public life being what it is, the Plaintiff has a galaxy of hidden enemies too. The nature of electoral politics in the recent past has undergone tremendous change and the standards also are sliding down with each passing day. Unhealthy practices have escalated enormously and honest & innocent political 4 OS.No.3465/2018 leaders and pillars of the Party are being victimized to substantially dent their electoral vote bank in the respective constituencies. To this is added the technological advancement which comes handy for the sharp practice. The Plaintiff happens to be a victim whose reputation & public image are being sought to be damaged for gaining electoral mileage.
3. It is further submitted that Public TV, a television News Channel telecast on the night of 15.12.2016 at around 10.04 p.m., a bold caption "Nirani Betiyagidda Subhash". This was immediately followed by another telecast in the form of breaking News "Shasaka Bilagi J T Patilara Rasaleele CD Subhash bali edeya?". The aforesaid TV Channel did telecast the aforesaid criminally defamatory captions. The unethical quarters that be, had tried to malign the name and fame of the Plaintiff which constrained him to file a Civil Suit in O.S.No.8642/2016 before this Court against some of the Electronic media seeking a Judgment and Decree of permanent injunction restraining them from telecasting any News item, story or caption or the like in or through their Channels implicating or tending to implicate the Plaintiff in any sex scandal or any other scandal and the Court had ordered 5 OS.No.3465/2018 an emergent notice to the Defendants therein. In the Plaintiff's W.P.No.65485/2016 against aforesaid order of this Court directing emergent notice to Defendants without interim injunction, the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka vide ad interim Order dated 22/12/2016 has issued restraint order against the Defendants therein. The conspiracy and acts of the quarters that be to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff did not stop here. In furtherance of their common ill design, some of the print media maliciously published defamatory stories couched in a language full of innuendo. These false stories suggest to the readers that the Plaintiff is involved some sex scandals and other scandals and that unless he apologizes publicly to the rival political group, his CD/video clip of the sex scandal would be released. This again constrained the Plaintiff to file O.S.No.6236/2017 before this Court against some of the Print and newly launched Electronic media seeking a Judgment and Decree of permanent injunction restraining them from telecasting any News item, story or caption or the like in or through their Channels implicating or tending to implicate the Plaintiff in any sex scandal or any other scandal. This Court vide ad interim Order dated 11/09/2017 had restrained the Defendants therein, from 6 OS.No.3465/2018 publishing any defamatory story about the Plaintiff through any medium. Because of what is said to be a scandal, a Minister of the Cabinet rank in the Congress regime namely H.Y.Meti stepped down from the Office a few months ago. In fact, the CID Police to whom the matter was entrusted investigated in the alleged sex scandal and submitted a Report that the sex scandal CD was a morphed one. This is based on the expert opinion given by the Forensic Science Laboratory. It is relevant to submit that H.Y.Meti whose image was sought to be tarnished approached this Court in OS.No.5683/2017 and obtained an order of temporary injunction restraining defamation. Till recently, the Plaintiff didn't realize that all this publication of false and defamatory stories, new items both in print and electronic media against him are the handy work of one Murugesh Nirani, his arch political rival whom he had defeated in the 2013 Elections to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly from the Bilagi constituency. In a Press Conference on 06/02/2018 the said Nirani had made a statement that "Shasakarobbara Cinema Shigradalle Bidugadeyagalide Kadu Nodi...". He had also said that he is in possession of a secret private Compact Disc(CD) of a MLA of the Indian National Congress Party. 7 OS.No.3465/2018
4. It is further submitted that Murugesh Nirani had made the aforesaid statements to the media indirectly referring to the Plaintiff. This was published by some of the Print Media. Immediately after publication of the aforesaid news item, the Plaintiff had filed a Civil Suit in OS.No.25228/2018 before this Court seeking a Judgment and Decree of permanent injunction restraining Murugesh Nirani from making any false and defamatory statements against him and restraining Murugesh Nirani and his henchmen from making public any video which shows the Plaintiff in a compromising position and restraining the remaining Defendants from telecasting any News item, story or caption or Statement or the like through any medium print/ electronic or the like implicating or tending to implicate the Plaintiff in any sex scandal or any other scandal. The Plaintiff withdrew the aforesaid Suit in OS.No.25228/2018 with liberty to institute a fresh suit in respect of the same subject matter, since he had not claimed damages from the Defendants therein for their nefarious act of tarnishing his reputation and public image. This Hon'ble Court vide order dated 6.3.2018 had permitted the Plaintiff to withdraw from the aforesaid suit with liberty to file fresh suit. The Plaintiff, with the aforesaid liberty granted 8 OS.No.3465/2018 by this Court filed OS.No.25312/2018 and this Court vide Interim Order dated 13/3/2018 restrained the Defendants therein from making any false and defamatory news against the Plaintiff. The Election Commission of India on 27/3/2018 had announced the schedule for the General Elections to the Legislative Assembly Karnataka, 2018 and the said schedule stipulated 24/4/2018 as the last date of Nominations; 12/5/2018 as date for Poll ; 15/5/2018 as Date of Counting and 18/5/2018 the date before which election shall be completed. Pursuant to the declaration of the elections to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly, the Plaintiff had filed his nomination as a candidate fielded by Indian National Congress Party. the Election Commission of India who is enjoined with the conduct of free, fair and transparent elections had issued certain guidelines to be observed by the media during the period of election. Pursuant to the said directions of the Election Commission of India, the Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka vide communication dtd. 5/5/2018 had circulated the same to all the concerned, for strict adherence between 6 pm of 10/5/2018 and 6.30 pm 12.5.2018.
9 OS.No.3465/2018
5. It is further submitted that, Bharathiya Janatha Party is a registered recognized National Political Party had filed WP.No.21478/2018 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka sought restraint order, alleging violation of aforesaid directions of the ECI by the media houses. The Hon'ble High Court vide Order dated 11/5/2018 pleased to restrain the media Houses who are parties to the said Writ Petition inter alia from telecasting, printing, publishing and circulating any article or statement in any manner in their television channels, web portals. Newspapers and social media of any candidate, which programme is likely to influence the voter in any manner whatsoever. The Hon'ble High Court in its aforesaid order had directed the Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka to communicate the said order to all the TV news Channels, all Newspapers, etc, for compliance. The relentless efforts are on from unnamed quarters to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff and other Political leaders of the Congress Party, keeping in view the eminent State Assembly Elections, by falsely implicating them in one or the other incidents or the like by taking the help of a section of electronic media. Bilagi Constituency is in North Karnataka which has a sizable section of rural illiterates with whom 10 OS.No.3465/2018 "Seeing TV is Believing TV". The Defendant TV Channel who is a newly launched Kannada News Channel is neither a Party to the aforesaid Suits filed by the Plaintiff nor Party in the aforesaid WP.No.21478/2018 filed by Bharathiya. Janatha Party, taking advantage of the same and in connivance with the quarters that be who are hell bent on to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff, telecast on 11/5/2018, at around 10.40 am, a day before Polling a One minute video and News item with caption "Patil Pallanga Purana..!", this was followed by another caption "Magala Vayassina Mahileyondige J.T.Patil Pallangadata". The Defendant TV channel did telecast the aforesaid video/captions by showing the pictures of the Plaintiff and a bed. The Plaintiff had filed Complaint with the Election Commission of India through Chief Electoral Officer, Bengaluru against the Defendant for violation of law, its Directions and Model Code of Conduct.
6. It is further submitted that, now, the counting of votes is scheduled to be held on 15/5/2018. The Plaintiff 11 OS.No.3465/2018 is of fair belief of emerging victorious in the elections and so also his party. New Government may be formed within a week therefrom. Any common man who watches the telecast or who reads the captions is bound to gather the impression that all that is true of the plaintiff and several people, friends. relatives and acquaintances residing in Bengaluru city, North Karnataka Area and other parts of the State, have watched the telecast and read the captions and enquired the Plaintiff and his family members. There has been a big conspiracy between the Defendant and some unseen hands, to tarnish his image by the continuous character assassination and thereby politically finishing him off. All this is being done with a malafide intent of damaging the name, fame and reputation of the Plaintiff. Because of these false stories, the Plaintiff has gone down in the esteem of the public in general, and of the people of his constituency. The malicious act of the Defendant is not only grossly defamatory of the Plaintiff, but also violative of his fundamental right to privacy and ordinary right to privacy as well. Once the reputation of a political leader is 12 OS.No.3465/2018 tarnished, it will have far reaching consequences and the damage is irreparable. The character assassination of public figures and people's representative has almost become order of the day. Late jurist of great repute Mr. N.A.Phalkivala had once stated and rightly "the character assassination should have been the National Sport of this Country....". His prophetic words are proved true going by abysmally low standards of a section of the Press/ Media. Damage to reputation once done can never be undone and more so in a society like ours. The Defendant has men and matter at its disposal to accomplish character assassination of the Plaintiff. The act of Defendant has put the Plaintiff to a great injustice and a huge hardship in the circle of family and friends and in the realm of voters. The Plaintiff is a man of unwavering integrity and of very high moral standards. The allegation is absolutely false. The false telecasts that are the subject matter of this Suit was made at Bengaluru and it was published throughout the State. The friends, relatives, voters and Party workers have called the Plaintiff in Bengaluru also and expressed their displeasure. The Defendant has violated the 13 OS.No.3465/2018 fundamental right of the Plaintiff of right of privacy and right to reputation. The Plaintiff is a law abiding citizen who has always tread his life boat with the rectitude. At no point of time any allegation was made against him by anyone in his long public life of about 5 decades. He cannot take law into his own hands for protecting his reputation. Hence, he approached this court. The Cause of action for this suit arose on 11.5.2018 when the defendant News Channel did telecast video. Hence, this suit.
7. In pursuance of the suit summons, the defendant remained absent and placed exparte.
8. In order to prove the case of the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked the documents at Ex.P1 to P10.
9. Heard the arguments of the counsel for plaintiff.
10. The points that would arise for my consideration are : -
1) Whether the plaintiff proves that the defendant TV Channel has telecast the defamatory captions and tried to malign the name and fame of the plaintiff ?
2) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought for ?14 OS.No.3465/2018
3) What order or decree?
11. My findings on the above points are as under:-
Point No.1: In the affirmative Point No.2: In the affirmative Point No.3: As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
12. Point No.1 and 2 :- Since these issues are inter- related each other then they are hereby discussed commonly in order to avoid repetition of facts.
13. In order to prove the case of the plaintiffs, the plaintiff himself has filed an affidavit in lieu of her examination- in-chief as PW.1 by reiterating the contents of the pleadings and he has relied upon the documents i.e., copy of election statistics issued by Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka marked at Ex.P1, copy of the news caption telecasted in Public TV on 15.12.2016 marked at Ex.P2, certified copy of the guidelines issued by Chief Electoral Officer to all the political parties, election officer, returning officer and also TV, News and Radio channels marked at Ex.P3, certified copy of the interim order passed by the Hon'ble High Court in WP.No.21478/2018 marked at Ex.P4, photographs of Focus T.V. telecast marked at Ex.P5 to P7 and the C.D. pertaining to the said photographs is marked at Ex.P8, e-mail copy sent to 15 OS.No.3465/2018 Additional Chief Electoral Officer regarding violation of Model Code of Conduct marked at Ex.P9 and certified copy of the order sheet in OS.No.6236/2017 marked at Ex.P10.
14. From the evidence of PW.1, it appears that PW.1 was elected as MLA from Bilagi during the period 1994-99 and 1999-2004 and he was also candidate for assembly election in 2004 and he was defeated in Parliamentary election of 2009. In the year 2013 general election he being a candidate of Congress and he defeated his nearest rival Murugesh R.Nirani of BJP party. He also a Member of the Committee on Estimates, Karnataka Legislative Assembly. His a worker of Indian National Congress. Unhealthy practices have escalated enormously and honest & innocent political leaders and pillars of the Party are being victimized to substantially dent their electoral vote bank in the respective constituencies. The Plaintiff happens to be a victim whose reputation & public image are being sought to be damaged for gaining electoral mileage. Public TV telecast on the night of 15.12.2016 at around 10.04 p.m., a bold caption "Nirani Betiyagidda Subhash" and it was immediately followed by another telecast in the form of breaking News "Shasaka Bilagi J.T.Patilara Rasaleele CD Subhash bali edeya?". 16 OS.No.3465/2018
15. Further he deposed that the conspiracy and acts of the quarters that be to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff did not stop here and in furtherance of their common ill design, some of the print media maliciously published defamatory stories couched in a language full of innuendo. The false stories suggest to the readers that the Plaintiff is involved some sex scandals and other scandals and that unless he apologizes publicly to the rival political group, his CD/video clip of the sex scandal would be released. Further, he deposed that he has filed a suit O.S.6236/2017 against the Print and newly launched Electronic media seeking restraining them from telecasting any News item or through their Channels implicating or tending to implicate the Plaintiff in any sex scandal or any other scandal. The Court vide interim Order dated 11/09/2017 had restrained the Defendants therein, from publishing any defamatory story about the Plaintiff through any medium. He did not realize that all this publication of false and defamatory stories, new items both in print and electronic media against him are the handy work of one Murugesh Nirani, whom he had defeated in the 2013 Elections to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly from the Bilagi constituency. In a Press Conference on 06/02/2018 the 17 OS.No.3465/2018 said Nirani had made a statement that "Shasakarobbara Cinema Shigradalle Bidugadeyagalide Kadu Nodi..." and he also said that he is in possession of a secret private CD of a MLA of the Indian National Congress Party. Murugesh Nirani had made the aforesaid statements to the media indirectly referring to him. This was published by some of the Print Media. Immediately after publication of the aforesaid news item, he had filed a Civil Suit in OS.25228/2018 restraining Murugesh Nirani from making any false and defamatory statements against him and restraining Murugesh Nirani from making public any video which shows him in a compromising position and restraining the remaining Defendants from telecasting any News item. He has withdrew the aforesaid Suit with liberty to institute a fresh suit in respect of the same subject matter and he had not claimed damages from the Defendants for their nefarious act of tarnishing his reputation and public image. He has filed a suit in OS.25312/2018 and an Interim Order dated 13/3/2018 passed restraining the Defendants therein from making any false and defamatory news against him. Further he deposed that the Election Commission of India on 27/3/2018 had announced the schedule for the General Elections to the Legislative 18 OS.No.3465/2018 Assembly Karnataka and the said schedule stipulated on 24/4/2018 as the last date of Nominations; 12/5/2018 as date for Poll ; 15/5/2018 as Date of Counting and 18/5/2018 the date before which election shall be completed. Pursuant to the declaration of the elections to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly, the Plaintiff had filed his nomination as a candidate fielded by Indian National Congress Party. The Election Commission of India had issued certain guidelines to be observed by the media during the period of election. Pursuant to the said directions of the Election Commission of India, the Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka vide communication dtd. 5/5/2018 had circulated the same to all the concerned, for strict adherence between 6 pm of 10/5/2018 and 6.30 pm of 12.5.2018. The BJP had filed WP.No.21478/2018 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and sought restraint order, alleging violation of aforesaid directions of the ECI by the media houses on 11.5.2018 to restrain the media Houses who are parties to the said Writ Petition inter alia from telecasting, printing, publishing and circulating any article or statement in any manner in their television channels, web portals. Newspapers and social media of any candidate, which programme is likely to influence the voter in any manner 19 OS.No.3465/2018 whatsoever. The Hon'ble High Court had directed the Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka to communicate the said order to all the TV news Channels, all Newspapers. Further he has stated that, the relentless efforts are on from unnamed quarters to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff and other Political leaders of the Congress Party, keeping in view the eminent State Assembly Elections, by falsely implicating them in one or the other incidents or the like by taking the help of a section of electronic media. Bilagi Constituency is in North Karnataka which has a sizable section of rural illiterates with whom "Seeing TV is Believing TV". The Defendant TV Channel who is a newly launched Kannada News Channel is neither a Party to the aforesaid Suits filed by the Plaintiff nor Party in the aforesaid WP.No.21478/2018 filed by BJP, taking advantage of the same and in connivance with the quarters that be who are hell bent on to tarnish the image of the Plaintiff, telecast on 11/5/2018, at around 10.40 am, a day before Polling a One minute video and News item with caption "Patil Pallanga Purana..!", the same was followed by another caption "Magala Vayassina Mahileyondige J.T.Patil Pallangadata". The Defendant TV channel did telecast the aforesaid video/captions by showing the pictures of the 20 OS.No.3465/2018 Plaintiff and a bed. He had filed Complaint with the Election Commission of India through Chief Electoral Officer, Bengaluru against the Defendant for violation of law, its Directions and Model Code of Conduct. Because of this telecast by the defendant, he lost the election. Several people, friends. relatives and acquaintances residing in Bengaluru city, North Karnataka Area and other parts of the State, have watched the telecast and read the captions and enquired the Plaintiff and his family members. There has been a big conspiracy between the Defendant and some unseen hands, to tarnish his image by the continuous character assassination and thereby politically finishing him off. All this being done with a malafide intent of damaging his name, fame and reputation. The malicious act of the Defendant is not only grossly defamatory of him, but also violative of his fundamental right to privacy and ordinary right to privacy as well. Once the reputation of a political leader is tarnished, it will have far reaching consequences and the damage is irreparable. The allegations made against him by the defendant is false. In support of the arguments of the learned counsel for the plaintiff, he relied upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1995 SC 264 - 21 OS.No.3465/2018 R.Rajagopal @ R.R.Gopal and another Vs. State of T.N. and others, AIR 1988 Karnataka 255 - Sonnakka Gopalagowda Shanthaveri Vs. U.R.Anantha Murthy, (2013) 10 SCC 591 Umesh Kumar Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and AIR 2000 SC 1410 Kuldip Singh Vs. Subhash Chander Jain.
16. From the evidence of PW.1 and the documents at Ex.P5 to P7, it reveals that the defendant TV channel telecast the video caption that "Patil Pallanga Purana..! " by showing the picture of a woman which was produced, which indicates that the defendant channel has telecast the same by violating the fundamental right of the privacy of the plaintiff. If the defendant not restrained by an injunction, definitely, the plaintiff would be put to great hardship and injury.
17. On careful scrutiny of the evidence of PW.1 and the documents relied by the plaintiff, it reveals that the defendant did telecast the video by showing the picture of the plaintiff and a bed in its TV Channel and the same is violative of his fundamental right to privacy and ordinary right to privacy as well. The defendant has telecast the video of the plaintiff which is defamatory without any material or information to publish the same which amounts to defamation against the plaintiff.
22 OS.No.3465/2018
18. The evidence of PW.1 and the documents produced by the plaintiff at Ex.P1 to P10 are remained unchallenged by the defendant. When the defendant did not enter into witness box to give evidence, an adverse inference can be drawn against it. By considering the facts and circumstances, it is just and necessary to restrain the defendant from further telecasting any news item, story or caption or statement or the like through any medium or the like implicating or tending to implicate the plaintiff in any sex scandal or any other scandal. In the light of the above discussions, I hold point No.1 and 2 in the affirmative.
19. Point No.3:- In view of the above discussions, I proceed to pass the following order:-
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed with costs.
The defendant is hereby restrained by way of permanent injunction from further telecasting any news item, story or caption or statement or the like through any medium or the like implicating or tending to implicate the plaintiff in any sex scandal or any other scandal. 23 OS.No.3465/2018
Draw a decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, typed by him, the transcript thereof corrected and then pronounced by me, in the open court, on this the 9th day of March, 2023).
(Kengabalaiah), XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for plaintiff:
P.W.1 J.T.Patil List of documents exhibited for plaintiff:
Ex.P1 Copy of Election Statistics
Ex.P2 Copy of News Caption of Public T.V.
Ex.P3 Certified copy of Guidelines issued by
Chief Electoral Officer, Karnataka
Ex.P4 Certified copy of interim order passed in
WP.No.21478/2018
Ex.P5 to 7 Copies of Photographs
Ex.P8 C.D.
Ex.P9 Copy of e-mail
Ex.P10 Certified copy of order sheet in
OS.No.6236/2017
List of witnesses examined for defendant:
Nil
List of documents exhibited for defendant:
Nil XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.