Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]latest-news-updates/editor-responsible-for-offending-news-items-sc-utkarsh-anand-19886.html"/> LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Editor responsible for offending news items: SC -Utkarsh Anand | Im4change.org
Resource centre on India's rural distress
 
 

Editor responsible for offending news items: SC -Utkarsh Anand
-The Indian Express

The Supreme Court held on Monday that only a newspaper’s editor whose name is published on its pages can be held responsible for civil or criminal cases lodged against it over offending news items.

Referring to the provisions of the Press and Registration of Books Act and taking a cue from its previous verdict, the court ruled that the Act puts prima facie liability only on the editor of a newspaper, since it is presumed that he controls the selection of matter published in the newspaper.

“The Press and Registration of Books Act recognises the editor and presumption is only against him. The Act does not recognise any other legal entity viz., chief editor, managing editor etc. for raising the presumption. They can be proceeded against only when there is specific allegation,” said a Bench led by Justice C K Prasad.

Referring to its 1992 verdict in the K M Mathew case, the court said that under the Act, every copy of the newspaper is required to contain the names of the owner and the editor, and the editor whose name is printed will be held responsible in any civil and criminal proceeding. “Section 7 of the Act makes the declaration to be prima facie evidence for fastening the liability in any civil or criminal proceeding on the editor,” it said.

“A news item has the potentiality of bringing doomsday for an individual. The editor controls the selection of the matter that is published. Therefore, he has to keep a careful eye on the selection. Blue-penciling of news articles by anyone other than the editor is not welcome in a democratic polity,” said the Bench.

However, the Bench said this presumption against the editor was rebuttable, and it would be deemed as sufficient evidence unless the contrary was proved.

“The Act does not recognise any other legal entity for raising the presumption. Even if the name of the chief editor is printed in the newspaper, there is no presumption against him under Section 7 of the Act,” clarified the court.

The apex court’s ruling came on an appeal by a man who had filed a criminal complaint against Gujarati daily Sandesh for publishing a contentious news item in its Vadodara edition in September 1999. The complainant was then an executive magistrate of Vadodara taluka.

Taking cognizance of his complaint, a magistrate initiated prosecution against the editor and the resident editor of the publication. The editor challenged this in High Court, contending that he was stationed in Ahmedabad and the offending news item was published in the Vadodara edition, for which the resident editor would be responsible.

He further said he was not aware of the offending news item being published in the newspaper, nor did he have a role in its selection. The HC allowed his application and set aside the proceedings against the editor.

The complainant, however, appealed against the relief to the editor. The Bench on Monday allowed the complainant’s appeal on the principle of responsibility of the editor and sent the matter to the lower court for conducting the prosecution against the editor also.