The Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, comprising Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice A. V. Sesha Sai in the case of Bollineni Rajagopal Naidu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh has direct the Police Officials to strictly follow the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, in all cases registered by them henceforth without fail.
Background of the Case
The petitioner is connected with mainstream electronic media news channel, namely, TV5 Telugu news. He filed the writ petition which has been preferred seeking direction to the respondent Police not to foist cases on media personnel or social media users in a cavalier manner.
Reasoning and Decision of the Court
The Court heard the arguments of both the parties. The Court expounded that Freedom of Press is an Implied Right inherent in the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Thus Freedom of Press is for the benefit of the general community; therefore, foisting of false cases or harassing the media personnel is opposed to the Constitutional Doctrine of Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression.
Then the Court considered the Petitioner’s prayer which is only for a direction to the respondents not to foist cases in a cavalier manner without concrete evidence and to direct the Police to follow the guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar. On which the Court held that “it is the duty of the Court to see that citizens are not harassed by arresting them in petty offences carrying punishment less than 7 years.”
The Court ordered the Police that the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar Case is already operative in the field and observes that the same shall be followed scrupulously in all sincerity by the police officers.
Afterwards the Court also instructed the Judicial Magistrate to apply their mind objectively in the obtaining facts of the case and pass a reasoned order. Any negligence in this regard shall be viewed seriously and the Judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the High Court as and when such defective detention authorization orders are brought to the notice of the High Court by or on behalf of the accused.
Therefore the Court disposed of the Petition without imposing any cost on it.
Case Details
Case: - WRIT PETITION (PIL) No.132 of 2021
Petitioner: - Bollineni Rajagopal Naidu
Respondent: - The State of Andhra Pradesh
Judge: Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice A. V. Sesha Sai
Picture Source :
