Sl. No.                                                         F. No. 14/789/02-03-PCI

Shri Hemanta Kumar Dash,  
Secretary, 
Jatiya Sabha Prathisthan 
Maripada, Orissa.  

Versus                                    

The Samaj,
Buxibazaar,
District Cuttack
Orissa.

Complaint

          This complaint dated 30.1.2003 has been filed by Shri Hemanta Kumar Dash, Secretary, Jatiya Sabha Pratisthan, Baripada, Orissa against the Samaj, an Oriya daily from Buxibazar, Cuttack for publication of an allegedly slanderous news item captioned “Jatiya Seba Pratisthana of Baripada is blacklisted under allegations of forgery” (English translation) in its issue dated 1.9.2002.

          It was reported in the impugned news item that the State Government had blacklisted Jatiya Seba Pratisthan for obtaining grant through forgery from the Central Government to set up a District Consumer Information Center in order to encourage  the consumer rights awareness among consumers in the tribal dominated Mayurbhanj District. It was further reported that the forgery issue was made public after the directions of State Food Supply & Consumer Welfare Department reached the District Administrator. It was alleged that forged recommendation of State Government department enabled the JSP to get the two-and-a-half lakhs rupees from the Central Government. It was also reportedly stated in the directive that no financial support and grant-in-aid and contribution be given to this blacklisted Jatiya Seba Pratisthan due to forgery.

          According to the complainant, his NGO, a voluntary consumer organisation, is a registered firm and he is a member of a number of State and social bodies, and was a Staff Reporter of ‘the Sambad” for the last one decade and then turned to social service. During his journalistic years, Shri Bijay Kumar Agarwal, Reporter of the respondent newspaper ‘the Samaj had falsely implicated the complainant in several false cases for no apparent reason with the sole purpose to damage his reputation by any means and to lower his social prestige in the public eyes. He alleged that in order to achieve this, the respondent reporter had published this libelous and slanderous news item against him. The complainant further alleged that the impugned news item has lowered his image in the eyes of the public and the respondent has violated the norms of journalistic ethics by suppressing his rejoinder.  

Written statement

          Comments of the respondent were invited on 16.6.2003 and (when no reply was received) after a gap of three months, a show cause notice was issued on 13.11.2003.  The respondent in his reply dated 3.10.2003 stated that they had committed no mistake in publication of the impugned news item. According to the respondent, the news item in question was based on the letter dated 22.8.2002 of the State Government of Orissa.  The Food Supplies & Consumer Welfare Department, came to know that the complainant and some other NGOs and VCOs had managed to obtain Rs.2.5 lakhs each from the Central Government’s consumer welfare fund by producing forged recommendation of the State Government authority, alleged the respondent. She also stated that the concerned reporter, deemed it proper to bring the matter to the notice of the general public of the locality, particularly since the complainant’s NGO was operating in the district. The complainant added that the impugned publication was an action in the right direction and there was nothing false in the news item in question.

 Counter comments

          The complainant in his counter comments dated 23.12.2003 stated that as per the Press Council Rules, the respondent needs to publish the clarification, if any from the affected party against whom a libellous news item was published, which neither he did nor submitted its justification. The complainant alleged that ignoring other important issues of corruption charges, the respondent reporter had published the impugned news item against him and his family.

          A copy of the counter comments was forwarded to the respondent on 3.2.2004 for information.

Appearance before the Inquiry Committee

          The matter came for hearing before the Inquiry Committee at New Delhi on 29.3.2005. The complainant was absent. Shri Biswnath Rath, Advocate entered appearance on behalf of the respondent newspaper.

          Learned counsel contended that the allegation of the complainant that the news report was false and defamatory was not maintainable. The report was correct. He submitted that on consideration of materials against some of the NGOs, Government of Orissa, Food Supplies and Consumer Welfare Department came to hold that complainant and some other NGOs and VCOs have managed to obtain Rs. 2.5 lakhs each as 1^st instalment to set up district Consumer Information Centre in the District mentioned against each from Government of India Consumer Welfare Fund by giving recommendation of Government of Orissa through false letter and signature of the authority. In the very same letter dated 22.8.2002 that Government intimated all concerned that no financial assistance or other grant-in-aid should be sanctioned in favour of all the NGOs/VCOs mentioned in the said letter. It was further decided that all the named NGOs/VCOs should not be engaged by any Government or Semi Government Organization for implementation of any scheme sponsored by Government/Semi-Government Organization. The press reporter, who belonged to Mayurbhanj, after receipt of the said information thought it proper to bring the matter of the complainant NGO to the general public of the locality particularly since complainant NGO was operating in the District of Mayurbhanj.  After the notification dated 22.8.2002 the Collector and the District Magistrate lodged a complaint to the Superintendent of Police Mayurbhanj against the petitioner establishment requesting them to take immediate suitable action on the allegations brought out vide letter dated 22.8.2002. Pursuant to the complaint lodged by the Collector and District Magistrate Mayurbhanj, Superintendent of Police Mayurbhanj registered the case vide F.I.R. No. 173 dated 28.8.2002 and the President, Secretary, Director, Cashier of the petitioner Organization have been booked under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC  

Recommendations of the Inquiry Committee

          In the absence of the complainant the Committee considered the record and the oral arguments of the learned counsel for the respondent. The Committee was satisfied that on the information given by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, to the Government of Orissa and on the complaint of Collector and District Magistrate, an FIR under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC had been registered against the complainant and further action thereon was under process.  Thus, the Committee was satisfied that the impugned news report was not meant to defame or harm the complainant but was in public interest. Therefore, no action was needed in the matter. It recommended to the Council to dispose of the matter with the above observations.

Decision of the Council

          The Press Council, on consideration of the records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts the reasons, findings and the recommendation of the Committee and decides accordingly.