Though a bench of the Kerala High Court recently upheld a single-judge order upholding the ban on Malayalam news channel MediaOne TV on the ground of national security, the Supreme Court on March 15 allowed it to resume operations for the time being.
A High Court bench, comprising Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly, held that it was satisfied after going through the contents of the confidential files produced before it in a sealed cover that the single judge was right in declining to interfere with the order passed by the Government of India. The order had refused renewal of uplinking and downlinking permission to M/s. Madhyamam Broadcasting Limited for telecast operations through Media One TV.
“The security of the State and the public order are very vital for the fair and smooth functioning of the nation and therefore, significance and importance shall be provided to the interests of the citizens of this country, rather than other aspects,” the judgment said.
On February 8, a single-judge bench presided by Justice N Nagaresh refused to provide any relief to Media One TV after perusing the confidential files which he had summoned in a sealed cover, without allowing access of it to the petitioner.
From the submissions, the bench drew the conclusion that “it is discernible that the Committee of Officers took note of the inputs given by the intelligence agencies as regards the petitioner company, and found that the inputs are of a serious nature and falls under the security rating parameters. In the circumstances, the Committee of Officers advised not to renew the licence. This Court finds that the recommendations of the Committee of Officers as finally accepted by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, are justified by supporting materials”, the judgment read.
Affirming the single-judge decision, the division bench observed: “It is true that the nature, impact, gravity and depth of the issue is not discernible from the files. But, at the same time, there are clear and significant indications impacting the public order and security of the State. Since it is a confidential and sensitive file maintained by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Union of India, we are not expressing anything further in the interest of national security, public order and other aspects concerning the administration of the nation.”
The division bench also held that as per the policy guidelines for uplinking of television channels, dated December 5, 2011, and with regard to grant of permission and renewal for uplinking and downlinking by the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MI&B), the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) is an inseparable link.
On May 3 last year, the petitioner had submitted an application seeking renewal of permission of the TV channel’s licence for a further period of 10 years. The application was forwarded to the MHA by the MI&B on November 29 last year. However, on December 29 last year, the MHA denied security clearance to the company.
Following this, the MI&B issued a show cause notice on January 1, 2022, to the petitioner asking why permission seeking renewal should not be denied. In response, the petitioner on January 19 stated that they were unaware of the grounds of denial of renewal of security clearance as it had not been communicated to them and they were never granted an opportunity of being heard while denying the clearance.
Eventually, the proceedings arising from the show cause notice resulted in the order passed by the MI&B on January 31 revoking the permission granted to the company to uplink and downlink a news and current affairs TV channel. The company argued before the High Court that it had never been given reasons as to how it had violated national security, and were therefore denied clearance, in violation of the principles of natural justice. Besides, the petitioner contended that the action of the government violated press freedom.
Within a few hours of the High Court’s verdict, MediaOne TV went before the Supreme Court challenging the division bench order. The Supreme Court on March 13, 2022, issued a notice. A bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud said: “Issue notice returnable on March 15. The Respondents shall produce relevant files on which reliance was placed by the high court in the impugned judgment.”
Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Dushyant Dave, representing MediaOne TV, contended before the bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant and Vikram Nath, that the channel has been completely closed down and it had close to 2.5 crore viewers every day. Rohatgi said there is nothing against the TV channel and said several hundred people have become unemployed after the channel was closed down. “How will we feed these employees?” asked Rohatgi. The counsel urged the top court to direct the centre to bring on record those files which it had submitted in the High Court. The top court scheduled the matter for further hearing.
On March 7, Dave mentioned the matter before a bench headed by CJI NV Ramana. He submitted that for 11 years, the organisation had functioned and the channel had 350 employees and millions of viewers. Dave said: “We have been shut down due to some secret files from the home ministry and the court has justified it behind our back. It’s too serious a matter relating to the right to information and freedom of press.”
Last month, a group of journalists, editors, lawyers, activists and parliamentarians issued a statement calling it a “clampdown on broader press freedom in India”.
But in a positive sign on March 15, the Supreme Court stayed the centre’s order and allowed the channel to resume operations till further orders.
—By Abhilash Kumar Singh and India Legal Bureau