The Karnataka High Court has granted an interim stay on 2 separate criminal cases lodged against BJP IT cell head Amit Malviya and Republic TV Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami, halting all further legal action until the next hearing.
Justice S. Rachiah passed the order, responding to petitions from both Malviya and Goswami seeking to quash the FIRs filed against them over allegations of spreading falsehoods about the Indian National Congress (INC).
Alleged Disinformation Campaign
The complaints allege that Malviya and Goswami led a “criminally motivated campaign” that falsely claimed the Congress operates an office in Istanbul, Turkiye. Multiple FIRs were registered across states—including Karnataka, after the INC accused them of defaming the party, inciting unrest, and potentially endangering diplomatic ties at a time of heightened sensitivity following the Pahalgam terror attack and India’s Operation Sindoor.
Republic TV’s Apology
In the wake of these allegations, Republic TV issued a public correction on May 20. The channel admitted that an image purportedly showing the Istanbul Congress Centre was mistakenly included in its digital coverage—a mistake attributed to a video editor after the live broadcast had ended. Republic TV described the error and subsequent apology as “unconditional and sincere,” clarifying that the image was never aired during Arnab Goswami’s prime-time debate.
Separate FIR Over Morphed Image
Malviya faces a second case stemming from a doctored social media post. He had shared an image merging the faces of Rahul Gandhi and Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir, alongside a caption questioning if Gandhi was aligning with Pakistan’s narrative and even vying for the Nishan-e-Pakistan, Pakistan’s highest civilian honour. On May 21, Malviya reiterated on his X handle the claim that the INC opened an Istanbul office in 2019, dismissing the legal action as a distraction and demanding a substantive rebuttal from the party.
Legal Contentions
During Thursday’s hearing, Senior Advocate Aruna Shyam, arguing for both petitioners, challenged the validity of the charges and their political undertones. She pointed out an apparent upgradation of offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)—from a bailable offence under Section 352 (assault or use of criminal force) to a non-bailable offence under Section 353 (intending to provoke a breach of peace). Shyam contended that Section 353 was misapplied, noting that
“He (Gandhi) is not a government functionary but the opposition leader.”
The State’s counsel countered that the probe remained in its initial stages, with only notices issued so far and no immediate plans to arrest either Malviya or Goswami. The court’s interim order thus allows the investigation to continue, subject to judicial oversight.
With the stay in place, both cases are paused until the High Court delivers its next ruling. Observers will be watching closely to see whether the court ultimately quashes the FIRs or allows the prosecutions to proceed, potentially setting important precedents on political speech, media responsibility, and the thresholds for criminal defamation and public order offences.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
