Himachal Pradesh High Court
Dr. Rajeev Bindal vs . Desh Raj Labana & Others. on 9 November, 2022
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
Dr. Rajeev Bindal Vs. Desh Raj Labana & others.
.
Civil Suit No. 136 of 2022 9.11.2022 Present: Mr.Sudhir Thakur, Senior Advocate, alongwith Mr.Karun Negi, Advocate, for the plaintiff. OMP No. 776 of 2022 The applicant/plaintiff has filed suit for recovery of damages and decree for permanent prohibitory injunction and for mandatory injunction against non-applicants/defendants whereby amongst other, inter-alia prayer for restraining the non-applicants/defendants from circulating, publishing, posting articles, news items, on his Facebook account maintained by him under their ID or any other ID, WhatsApp, twitter or any other social media platform, concerning the plaintiff in any manner and to cause imputation to the plaintiff in any manner either by themselves or through their agents, servants, assignees, family members etc. has also been made.
2. The applicant/plaintiff has placed on record printouts/copies of Facebook posts of various dates, wherein allegations against the applicant/plaintiff doubting his honesty and integrity have been made.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff that the applicant/plaintiff is in social and political activities since his student life and has been elected member of H.P. Legislative Assembly thrice from Solan and Nahan constituencies of H.P. Vidhan Sabha and he also ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:33:53 :::CIS remained Health Minister of Himachal Pradesh. Further that .
he also remained in various social and religious activities throughout the country and is well known figure in the society. Further that applicant/plaintiff, on account of meritorious background and outstanding caliber, was also elected Speaker of Himachal Pradesh Vidhan Sabha and is having outstanding reputation in the public at large which is well known to the defendants and their associates, and he also remained President of Himachal Pradesh Bhartiya Janta Party and was also holding various posts of the said political party.
4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicant/plaintiff that with an intention to malign the status of the plaintiff and impute him, non-applicants/defendants are sending defamatory posts on Facebook accounts, Whatapp messages and other platforms of social media relating to the plaintiff by creating doubt about plaintiff's honesty, integrity, credibility, morality and working capability which are far away from reality but an attempt to tarnish the image and reputation of the plaintiff in the eyes of public and these allegations are baseless and without any substance and authentic material.
5. It has been further canvassed by learned counsel for plaintiff-applicant that defendants have been indulging in unfair and malafide tactics and acts just to gain political mileage and acts and conduct of the defendants which have no basis of truth, but for undue gain defendants have indulged in ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:33:53 :::CIS tarnishing reputation and integrity of the plaintiff in the .
estimation of public at large, political circle, relatives, friends and social circle by the series of acts and conducts of publishing defamatory and derogatory statements against the plaintiff causing him mental shock and agony as the same has impaired and lowered down the moral, intellectual character, credibility and integrity of the plaintiff in the estimation of public at large.
6. Learned applicant/plaintiff further submits that non- applicants/defendants have knowledge that they are making false allegations knowingly and intentionally, which are not genuine and authentic and it has come in the knowledge of plaintiff that defendants have posted series of imputations on the Facebook account maintained by the defendants on dated7.8.2022, 11.6.2022, 12.8.2022, 26.8.2022, 9.9.2022, 1.11.2022 and on various other dates, therefore, prayer for issuance of interim direction has been made.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant-plaintiff pressing for interim order, has referred pronouncement of the Apex Court in Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and others vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India and another, (2012) 10 SCC 603, wherein the Apex Court has laid down the principles governing passing of prior restraint order against publication in some exceptional cases discussing the exceptions involved in detail.
::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:33:53 :::CIS
8. Reliance has also been put on judgment in State of .
Maharashtra vs. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi, (1997) 8 SCC 386, wherein it has been observed by the Apex Court that media trial is very antithesis of rule of law and it can well lead to miscarriage of justice.
9. Learned counsel for the applicant-plaintiff has also referred copy of order dated 16.01.2014, passed by Delhi High Court in I.A. No.723/2014 in CS(OS) No.102/2014, titled as Swatanter Kumar vs. The Indian Express Ltd. & others, wherein restraint order was passed against publication of write up, articles and telecast which were prima-facie defamatory.
10. Without adjudication, no conclusive findings as to correctness or falsity of the allegations can be arrived at this stage. However, on perusal of material available on record, prima facie, it appears that unverified allegations can prejudicially affect the public mind and there is real and tangible risk of media trial of the applicant-plaintiff without verifying the authenticity of the allegations. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for plaintiff prima-facie it appears that there is substance in the plea and apprehension of the plaintiff that there may be an attempt to create an adverse public image of the applicant-plaintiff with ulterior motive and intention on the basis of false, unverified and unauthentic allegations.
::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:33:53 :::CIS
11. In view of above, balance of convenience lies in .
favour of the applicant-plaintiff for passing an ad-interim order as a prima facie case, indicating irreparable loss to the applicant-plaintiff, in absence of restraint order, is made out.
12. Accordingly, non-applicants/defendants, their agents, nominees, representatives, successors and assignees, are restrained from making or publishing any false or libelous statements or material without verification and confirming its authenticity against the applicant-plaintiff, till next date of hearing.
13. It is made clear that observations made in this order are prima facie in nature.
14. Compliance of Order 39 Rule 3 CPC be made by 10.11.2022.
15. Notices to the non-applicants/defendants in main suit have also been ordered to be issued, returnable on 14th December, 2022, the date already fixed by the Registry for service of defendants in main suit vide order dated 7.11.2022. Applicant-plaintiff as well as Registry to make compliance on their part.
Applicant/plaintiff is permitted to produce a copy of this order, downloaded from the web-page of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, before the authorities concerned, and the said authorities shall not insist for production of certified copy, ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:33:53 :::CIS but, if required, may verify passing of the order from the .
Website of the High Court.
(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.
9th November, 2022
(Keshav/sd)
r to
::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2022 20:33:53 :::CIS