Derogatory remark against Sufi saint: SC refuses to quash FIRs against TV news anchor
New Delhi, Dec 7: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to quash FIRs against TV anchor Amish Devgan for his alleged defamatory remark against Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti during a show on June 15 but said he will get protection from any coercive action if he continues to cooperate with the probe.
A bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar and Sanjiv Khanna also transferred all FIRs filed against Devgan in different states, including Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Telangana, to Ajmer in Rajasthan.
The apex court had earlier granted Devgan protection from any coercive action in connection with the FIRs.
Several FIRs were lodged against Devgan for using a derogatory term for the Sufi saint in the news debate show called ''Aar Paar'' on his channel on June 15. Devgan later tweeted an apology saying he was actually referring to Muslim ruler Alauddin Khilji and inadvertently ended up naming Chisti.
Devgan through his lawyer Mrinal Bharti had moved the top court seeking quashing of the FIRs saying it was a slip of the tongue and he had already expressed regret for the 'inadvertent" error.
He had told the apex court that "none of the FIRs said that public order was being disturbed".
Senior advocate Manish Singhvi, appearing for Rajasthan, had opposed Devgan's plea for quashing of the FIRs saying the investigation is the right of the police.
The apex court, while granting interim relief to Devgan, had also stayed the probe in the cases related to the telecast against the journalist. The journalist has said the plea concerned his life and liberty.
"In a well-orchestrated manner, the petitioner has been made a victim of country-wide filing of false and baseless criminal complaint and FIRs on the one hand, and on the other hand, petitioner, his family and his crew has been abused unabashedly on social media and by personal messages by unknown persons.
"The petitioner has also received several death threats from various anti-social elements," Devgan's plea submitted.
It said that Devgan was holding a discussion on a petition filed before the top court on his show on June 15 on the issue of the Places of Worship Special Provisions Act.
"During the course of the live heated discussion one of the panelists quoted 'Chisti' (Hazrat Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti) and inadvertently, the petitioner (Devgan) who wanted to refer to the historical figure Khilji(Alauddin Khilji) as a marauder, mentioned the name 'Chisti'," the plea submitted.
"That immediately on realising his inadvertent slip of tongue during the heated debate in his show, the petitioner tendered a clarification and clarified that the name "Chisti' was mentioned by error and inadvertently," it said.
Devgan tweeted the clarification on his personal Twitter account on the intervening night of June 16-17.
The channel also carried a video clarification featuring the journalist, the plea said.
The Sufi saint's dargah in Ajmer is an important pilgrimage centre and visited by thousands of people each day.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Trump sues BBC for USD 10 billion, alleges defamation over edited Jan 6 speech
Washington (AP): President Donald Trump filed a lawsuit Monday seeking USD 10 billion in damages from the BBC, accusing the British broadcaster of defamation as well as deceptive and unfair trade practices.
The 33-page lawsuit accuses the BBC of broadcasting a “false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory, and malicious depiction of President Trump,” calling it “a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence” the 2024 US presidential election.
It accused the BBC of “splicing together two entirely separate parts of President Trump's speech on January 6, 2021” in order to ”intentionally misrepresent the meaning of what President Trump said.”
The lawsuit, filed in a Florida court, seeks USD 5 billion in damages for defamation and USD 5 billion for unfair trade practices.
The BBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press.
The broadcaster apologised last month to Trump over the edit of the Jan. 6 speech. But the publicly funded BBC rejected claims it had defamed him, after Trump threatened legal action.
BBC chairman Samir Shah had called it an “error of judgment,” which triggered the resignations of the BBC's top executive and its head of news.
The speech took place before some of Trump's supporters stormed the US Capitol as Congress was poised to certify President-elect Joe Biden's victory in the 2020 election that Trump falsely alleged was stolen from him.
The BBC had broadcast the hourlong documentary — titled “Trump: A Second Chance?” — days before the 2024 US presidential election. It spliced together three quotes from two sections of the 2021 speech, delivered almost an hour apart, into what appeared to be one quote in which Trump urged supporters to march with him and “fight like hell.” Among the parts cut out was a section where Trump said he wanted supporters to demonstrate peacefully.
Trump said earlier Monday that he was suing the BBC “for putting words in my mouth.”
“They actually put terrible words in my mouth having to do with Jan. 6 that I didn't say, and they're beautiful words that I said, right?" the president said unprompted during an appearance in the Oval Office. "They're beautiful words, talking about patriotism and all of the good things that I said. They didn't say that, but they used terrible words.”
The president's lawsuit was filed in Florida. Deadlines to bring the case in British courts expired more than a year ago.
Legal experts have brought up potential challenges to a case in the US, given that the documentary was not shown in the country.
The lawsuit alleges that people in the US can watch the BBC's original content, including the “Panorama” series, which includes the documentary, by using the subscription streaming platform BritBox or a virtual private network service.
The 103-year-old BBC is a national institution funded through an annual license fee of 174.50 pounds (USD 230) paid by every household that watches live TV or BBC content. Bound by the terms of its charter to be impartial, it typically faces especially intense scrutiny and criticism from both conservatives and liberals.
