Kerala High Court Directs Centre To Decide On Plea Alleging Misuse Of 'Reporter TV' Broadcasting License Within 2 Months

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas disposed of the petition.

The petitioner, who is the president of the political party Twenty20, had approached the Court seeking a limited relief namely, a direction to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) to act upon a representation submitted on February 2, 2026.

According to the petition, the broadcast licence for Reporter TV was originally granted to Indo-Asian News Channel Private Limited. It is contended that attempts were made in 2023 to alter the company's shareholding structure.

It was further submitted that K.J. Jose, Managing Director of Reporter Broadcasting company, and V.V. Saju, shareholder of the company, sought to acquire the controlling stake of the Indo-Asian News Channel Pvt. Ltd. but the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has denied security clearance citing grounds linked to national security.

The representation dated February 2 has alleged that the ninth respondent, Indo-Asian News Channel Private Limited, which controls and manages Reporter TV, had transferred shares to another entity Reporter Broadcasting Company Private Limited, without prior approval from the Ministry which is in violation of applicable license conditions.

The petitioner has also indicated that he had initiated separate legal proceedings over allegedly defamatory content aired by the channel.

During the hearing, the DSGI appearing for the Central government informed the Court that subsequent to the petitioner's representation, the Ministry of Home Affairs had already taken preliminary action, including cancelling the security clearance granted to the ninth respondent and issuing a show-cause notice.

The Counsel for the ninth respondent, submitted that the authorities had sought their comments on the allegations raised in the representation and that a response had already been furnished.

Taking note of these developments, the Court observed that the matter was already under consideration by the competent authorities and disposed of the writ petition.

The Court thus directed the Central Government to proceed in accordance with law and render a decision on the petitioner's representation.

“Accordingly there will be direction to the first respondent to take a decision with respect to Exhibit P1 (representation) with an outer time limit period of two months after the receipt of the copy of the judgement and after hearing both the parties.” the Court ordered.

Case Title: Sabu M Jacob v Union of India and Ors.

Case No: WP(C) 6889/ 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 168

Counsel for Petitioner: Vijay V Paul, Ajay V Anand, Rojit Zachariah, P V Uttara, Angela Elsa John, Radhika Prasad, Mohammed Azif S

Counsel for Respondents: O.M Shalina (DSGI), P.Martin Jose, P. Prijith, Thomas P. Kuruvilla, R. Githesh, Ajay Ben JOse, Manjunath Menon, Anna Linda Eden, Harikrishnan S, Anavadya Sanil Kumar, Anjali Krishna, Abhinav P.S