Bribery Case: Bengaluru Court Restrains 46 Media Organisations From Publishing Any Defamatory Opinion Against BJP MLA Madal Virupakshappa, His Son

Judge Balagopalkrishna in the order said, “The defendants are hereby temporarily restrained from Airing or Broadcasting or publishing or expressing any defamatory opinion against the plaintiffs in the news channels, public media and also conducting any panel discussions in any manner, till next date of hearing.

Major news organisations like The Times of India, Banglore Mirror, Deccan Herald, The Indian Express, The Hindu, NDTV 24x7, Aaj Tak are defendants in the suit filed by Virupakshappa and his son.

The court observed that merely because the Lokayuktha police has raided the office of the MLA's son and seized a bundle of notes, cannot give inference that both of them are involved in the huge corruption scandal.

"Merely, the amount seized is not a ground to come to the conclusion that the plaintiffs are rank corrupt," said the court.

Recently, a complaint was lodged before the Lokayuktha Police alleging that Virupakshappa demanded illegal gratification to process a certain tender in Karnataka Soaps & Detergents Ltd (KSDL).

Pursuant to the complaint, the Lokayuktha Police registered an FIR for offences under section 7(a) of PC (Amended) Act, 2018 against the MLA and others. Later, Virupakshappa's son V Prashanth Madal and other accused were allegedly caught red-handed accepting a graft of Rs 40 lakh. It has also been alleged that over Rs 8 crore was recovered by Lokayukta from the MLA's son. On Tuesday, the High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to the legislator.

The plaintiffs have approached the civil court claiming that defendants jointly and severally are making false and defamatory allegations against the plaintiffs by broadcasting the allegations.

Further, it was argued that the Virupakshappa is a mass leader and in the next coming election, the party wants to assign a responsible job to him. The rival parties having rivalry against Virupakshappa through the media are floating a "false news" against him and his son, the court was told. 

It was alleged that media houses are making false and defamatory allegations and defaming the Good Will of the plaintiffs.

“Whatever allegations made by various media including electronic media are baseless and without confirming themselves about the truth. Thus, if such broadcasting is continued, it is nothing but a character assassination of the plaintiffs and also without giving opportunity to the plaintiffs to explain the situations," the counsel representing the plaintiffs said. 

On going through the averments, the court said: “No doubt, whatever the statement made by the media should be bonafide and in the interest of larger public interest. Mere saying that, plaintiffs are corrupt is acceptable, but ... often broadcasting the same in various news channels owned by the defendants and conducting panel discussions is nothing, but an assassination of character of plaintiffs, that too when the matter is being investigated by the Lokayuktha police. Under Constitution living in a dignity is also a Constitutional right.”

It added: “No doubt, the media people can also make publications, if there is a truth. The same shall be subject to verification whether it contains truth or not and they should possess material. Merely, on the basis of the statement given by the persons the defendants shall not broadcast news as per their whims and fancies in order to help the other wings. The Constitutional right given to the media should not be misused by them.”

The court said the defendants are conducting programmes and broadcasting news "only with an intention to harm the Good Will of Society and there is no bonafide in their act without ascertaining the truth."

"Therefore, I am of the opinion it is a fit case to dispense the notice as contemplated under Order 39 Rule 3 CPC and grant ex-parte T.I,” said the court.

The court has now posted the matter for further hearing on April 20.

Case Title: Madalu Virupakshappa K & ANR And M/s Times of India & Others

Case No: OS 1537/2023

Date of Order: 06-03-2023

Appearance: Advocate M Subramanya for plaintiff.