Karnataka High Court Declines To Quash Case Against TOI Editorial Director Jaideep Bose For Allegedly Defamatory Article On Auction Of Artwork
The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a defamation case registered against Jaideep Bose, Editorial Director of Bennett Coleman and Co Ltd, which publishes the newspaper Times of India.
A single-judge bench of Justice N S Sanjay Gowda, however, quashed the proceedings initiated under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code against the company.
The company, Bose and others had approached the court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in the year 2014. The proceedings were initiated by M/s Bid And Hammer Auctioneers Private Limited after an allegedly defamatory article was published in the newspaper about an auction of artwork being conducted by the complainant.
The petitioners contended that the article published was the assertion of experts in the field, and would therefore not amount to defamation. Moreover, it was said that the newspaper had the right to report a newsworthy article, more so when it is the opinion of experts in the field.
The bench perused the article and said, “A reading of the first and the second paragraphs in the article, however gives a distinct impression that a finding has already been recorded by the author of the article that the original paintings were in the safe custody, while duplicates/fake paintings were sought to be auctioned.”
Further, it said that a mere reporting of the view of an expert would be different from an article which gives a categorical finding to begin with, and thereafter seeks the support of experts in the field.
It further held that since the complaint did not contain any assertions regarding the participation of the company (Bennett Coleman And Co Ltd), it would not be justifiable to proceed against the company and the proceedings against the company was quashed.
The Court rejected the contention raised by Bose that he was only an Editorial Director and as required under the Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867, the Director is a person who would be responsible for the publication of an article and and an editorial director who is only in charge of the policy decisions of the newspaper cannot be proceeded against.
Accordingly, the court concluded: “A reading of the complaint does indicate that a specific assertion is made that the second accused oversaw the contents of the newspapers and was responsible for the contents. In light of this specific allegation against the second petitioner, there is no justification for quashing the proceedings as against the second petitioner.”
Appearance: Advocate P N Rajeswara for Petitioners
Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol for Advocate Nikit Bala for Respondents
Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 301
Case Title: Bennett Coleman And Co Ltd & Others AND M/s Bid And Hammer Auctioneers Private Limited.
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3829 OF 2017