Court cites legislative decriminalization and procedural delays in dismissing charges from 2012 incident.
In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against TV9 Karnataka Private Limited and its correspondents, initially charged under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995. The court, presided over by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, cited the legislative amendment brought by the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, which decriminalized the alleged offenses, and the inordinate delay of eight years in filing the complaint as the primary reasons for dismissal.
The legal proceedings stemmed from an incident on March 2, 2012, at the City Civil Court complex in Bengaluru, where a chaotic confrontation between media personnel, police, and advocates led to multiple injuries and numerous FIRs. TV9 Karnataka and two of its correspondents were implicated in broadcasting false news which allegedly escalated tensions during the incident.
The High Court observed that the legislative amendment had transformed the contravention under Section 16 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act from a criminal offense to a civil infraction, thus removing the penal consequences originally attached to the alleged actions of TV9 Karnataka. Justice Nagaprasanna emphasized that such legislative changes, beneficial to the accused, should be applied retrospectively to mitigate legal harshness, following precedents set by the Supreme Court in similar contexts.
Moreover, the court highlighted the procedural lapse on the part of the state authorities, noting the eight-year delay in filing the complaint after the initial proceedings were quashed in 2019. The court ruled that such unexplained delays constituted an abuse of the legal process, further undermining the justification for continuing the prosecution.
Responding to arguments from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which sought to proceed based on the original date of the offense, the court maintained that the absence of a criminal provision at the time of complaint registration invalidated the prosecution's basis. The court reiterated that the revival of proceedings without fresh material or evidence was a misuse of judicial liberty.
Justice Nagaprasanna's ruling underscores the necessity of timely legal action and the impact of legislative changes on ongoing prosecutions, reinforcing the doctrine of beneficial construction in criminal jurisprudence. This decision brings closure to a long-standing legal saga, reaffirming the principles of justice and legal fairness.
Bottom line:-
Criminal proceedings under Section 5 read with Section 16 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 quashed due to inordinate delay, lack of fresh material, and subsequent legislative amendment decriminalizing the offence.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 5 and 16 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, Section 18 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, Section 153A(1)(b) of IPC, Section 196 of Cr.P.C, Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023.
