HC Denies Anticipatory Bail To Madhu Kishwar In Social Media Video Clip Case

CHANDIGARH, May 30: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of academician Madhu Purnima Kishwar in a case registered against her for allegedly retweeting a video clip on social media.

The bench of Justice Aman Chaudhary on Friday observed that there was a distinction between “constructive criticism and tweeting/trolling” and said that since Kishwar had a large following on social media, the repercussions could be huge.

The court, in its order, observed this was not a “solitary incident” and that Kishwar had been posting on “sensitive” matters.

The high court noted that the investigation is at a nascent stage and several aspects are yet to be brought out and dismissed Kishwar’s plea, seeking prearrest bail in the matter.

Kishwar had been booked on charges of defamation, promoting enmity and other offences by Chandigarh Police following a complaint alleging circulation of forged and misleading content on social media.

Kishwar, through her counsels Kapil Sibal and Sartaj Singh Narula, contended that the only allegation against her was that she had retweeted a 14-second video clip on social media platform X, which was innocuous and without any illintent.

The offence of forgery is not made out against her, as she is not the one who had prepared the video, according to the plea.

She is a seasoned academician, who has authored many books and has no criminal antecedents, her counsels argued.

They argued that her previous posts cannot be taken into consideration for this case as no action has been taken against her regarding those posts. She has no control over the comments others make on what she uploads/posts, thus cannot be held responsible for acts of others, the counsels submitted.

The counsel appearing for the Union Territory of Chandigarh contended that it would be wrong to say it was a mere retweet by Kishwar.

The video in question was first uploaded by another person on Facebook, Instagram and YouTube. Then Kishwar downloaded the video and uploaded it on her X, where she has a huge following, with 18 lakh persons, the counsel submitted.

“The same (video) got widely circulated and received 1,74,000 views, which would make her gain further popularity in such issues. Thus she not only aided in spreading misinformation, but also defamed the image of the head of the government,” the counsel submitted.

The court while referring to a status report in the matter, observed that even though the first notice was duly served to the petitioner at her Delhi address on April 20, she failed to appear before the investigating agency.

This continued for the notices dated April 26 and May 5, which by itself shows her conduct of non-cooperating with the investigating agency, the court observed.

“Apparently, the video under scanner, was uploaded on other social media platforms, however, as a matter of fact, it was only after the petitioner uploaded the same with her comment/s, that it garnered 1,74,000 views and speculations were made of it resembling the holder of a Constitutional post, which was confirmed when she further retweeted in that regard,” the court said in its order.

“There is, however, an obvious distinction between constructive criticism and tweeting/trolling to malign, cause aspersions and insinuations, and in (this) case, the same is by someone like the petitioner, who has a large social media following, the magnitude of the repercussions can be far from that can be fathomed,” the court stated.

“Such posts can create disharmony, encourage separatist sentiments and put the unity and integrity at peril. She, being a prominent social media personality and a scholar, as has been proclaimed on her behalf cannot be presumed to be oblivious to the impact of such a tweet, which created a stir, as it attracted not only 1,74,000 views but even comments by other co-accused and public at large,” the court observed.

Further, had it been a solitary incident, one may have still given it another thought, but as has been brought out, even on previous occasions, she had been tweeting with different hashtags material/posts of “sentimental sensitivity”, as is depicted in the status report, it said.

Given that, misconception and misinformation can be made to spread at lightning speed due to social media, “there comes greater social responsibility whilst creating content and forwarding the same,” it said. “Where seeing becomes believing, regulatory provisions are in an emergent need.” The court further observed that the peculiarity of the facts and circumstances of the present case being such that the investigation is at a nascent stage and several aspects remain to be unearthed.

“It is way too soon to rule out the element of criminality involved, as such this court is not inclined to grant the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Ex consequenti, this petition stands dismissed,” read the court order. (Agencies)