The Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Punjab Police to refrain from taking any coercive actions against Bathinda-based journalist Rattandeep Singh Dhaliwal. This directive comes after multiple police complaints were filed against him by members of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). The complaints arose following Dhaliwal’s assertion in a podcast that around 32 sitting AAP MLAs might not be considered for candidacy in the upcoming Punjab assembly elections.
Justice Rohit Kapoor, presiding over the case, emphasized the impracticality of responding to numerous notices issued from different districts, stating, “It will be impossible for a person to respond to so many notices.” He reminded the state that justice must not only be served but also be seen to be served, underscoring that within 24 hours, one cannot be expected to appear across the state.
The court highlighted a critical issue regarding journalism ethics, stating that if a journalist operates with a singular agenda against one political party, it cannot be classified as independent journalism. Justice Kapoor remarked, “If there is an agenda against only one particular party, then you can’t say it is independent journalism.” He further stressed the principle of equality before the law, noting that journalists, like any other citizens, do not enjoy immunity from legal scrutiny.
Dhaliwal has been instructed to file an additional affidavit to substantiate his claims. The court granted this request after Senior Counsel for Dhaliwal sought a short accommodation for the same. The matter is scheduled for a subsequent hearing on June 16.
The order followed comments by Punjab Advocate General Maninderjit Singh Bedi, who urged the journalist to present the documents he relied on for his claims about AAP candidates. Bedi insisted that Dhaliwal should affirm the authenticity of these documents through an affidavit. Conversely, Senior Advocate RS Bains, representing Dhaliwal, opposed this demand, arguing that journalistic integrity involves protecting sources. “He is asking for privileged information. You cannot ask a journalist a source just like you cannot ask a lawyer,” Bains argued, further noting the intimidation behind the police actions.
More Read
Dhaliwal’s petition seeks to quash the proceedings initiated by the police based on the AAP MLAs’ complaints. He claims the ruling party opted for legal action instead of issuing clarifications or denials concerning his broadcast. Dhaliwal faces police notices from districts including Patiala, Amritsar, Bathinda, and Ferozepur, with allegations of police intimidation through raids despite his willingness to cooperate.
The plea also highlights a broader issue, asserting that Punjab has a history of using criminal law to intimidate journalists. The High Court adjourned a session to review the controversial podcast, noting that only a small portion relevant to the complaints was provided.
Justice Kapoor, acknowledging the delicate balance required in journalism, remarked, “There is a thin line. I am not getting into the merits of the matter, whether it was some credible source or great journalist, but there appears to be some history with this journalist.” The Court reiterated the importance of impartial journalism while asserting protection for Dhaliwal, emphasizing, “Everybody, every citizen, be it a journalist or a lawyer, we are all supposed to be equal before law. So there is no such immunity that anybody enjoys.”
