The Supreme Court of India has recently addressed the liability of TV anchors for statements made by panelists during live broadcasts, delivering a judgment that emphasizes the importance of protecting journalistic freedom and free speech. The case involved K Srinivasa Rao, a Sakshi TV anchor, who was arrested for allegedly abetting defamatory statements made by a panelist on his show concerning Amaravati.
The court, comprising Justices Mishra and Manmohan, ordered Rao's release, asserting that a TV anchor cannot be held liable for remarks made by guests on their shows. The ruling underscores that holding an anchor responsible for the unscripted utterances of panelists could severely impede free speech and open discourse, potentially leading to a situation where every live discussion could result in legal repercussions for the host.
The arrest of Rao stemmed from a live show on Sakshi TV where a panelist made derogatory comments about Amaravati, referring to it in a disparaging manner. While Rao did not make the statements himself, and his lawyers argued he had no control over the panelist's remarks, he was arrested under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including defamation and public mischief, as well as provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The Andhra Pradesh police defended the arrest, alleging that Rao was not a passive bystander but had encouraged the panelist by laughing during the offensive statements.
Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, representing Rao, argued that his client's role was merely that of a host and that he should not be held accountable for the views expressed by others. He emphasized the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, suggesting that holding Rao liable would set a dangerous precedent. The Supreme Court bench seemed to agree, questioning the logic of holding an anchor responsible for the spontaneous statements of a guest.
In its order, the Supreme Court clarified that while anchors should exercise discretion in moderating discussions, they cannot be held accountable for unscripted remarks made by panelists unless there is evidence of collusion or incitement. The court acknowledged the crucial role of a journalist in a live broadcast and stressed the need to protect their participation under the umbrella of free speech.
However, the court also cautioned Rao against involving himself in any defamatory statements or allowing panelists to make such statements on his shows in the future, granting the trial court the authority to impose reasonable conditions. This part of the ruling underscores the responsibility of anchors to maintain a level of moderation and prevent the spread of hate speech or defamation on their platforms.
The Supreme Court's decision has been widely welcomed by media and civil rights organizations, who view it as a significant victory for journalistic freedom. The judgment clarifies the boundaries of liability for TV anchors and reinforces the importance of protecting free speech in the context of live television broadcasts. It also serves as a reminder that while freedom of expression is a fundamental right, it comes with the responsibility to exercise it with discretion and avoid promoting harmful or defamatory content.
