English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Jay Shah defamation case: Gujarat High Court restores gag on The Wire, portal to move SC

Published

on

Jay Shah defamation case: Gujarat High Court restores gag on The Wire, portal to move SC

The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday restored a gag order barring news portal The Wire to write further on the “exceptional” increase in Jay Shah’s firm’s turnover, said media reports.

The order was first issued after The Wire published a story in September 2017, which alleged that the turnover of a company owned by BJP President Amit Shah’s son Jay Shah had grown 16,000 times in a year after Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to power.

The order, issued in connection with a civil defamation case against the website, stops it from publishing any content “directly or indirectly” related to Jay Shah until the defamation case is disposed of.

Siddharth Vardarajan, the co-founding editor of The Wire, said they will challenge the verdict in the Supreme Court. “Going against several decades of jurisprudence, Gujarat High Court has restored gag order that trial court itself vacated after first granting Jay Amit Shah ex parte injunction against @thewire_in. We will challenge this verdict, which affects media freedom for all, in the Supreme Court,” Vardarajan said on Twitter.

The case pertains to the civil suit filed against the web portal through which Jay Shah has claimed a damage of Rs 100 crore. The Ahmedabad district court had granted an interim injunction against the portal, restraining it from further publishing anything on the same subject. In December 2017, the court lifted the injunction and ruled that barring the use of the words “Narendra Modi becoming prime minister/elected prime minister” in relation to any debate on the original article on Jay Shah, The Wire was free to publish content on his business and public activities.

Jay Shah had moved the High Court in December 2017 against the order of Ahmedabad district court. After the hearing in the case concluded on Jan 19, Justice Paresh Upadhyay reserved the verdict.

The lawyers appearing for The Wire had argued: “We stand by the article. Do we need to do the article threadbare … whether it is defamatory or not I stand by it and to succeed in interim injunction I don’t need to prove it. At this stage, the interim injunction prevents a public discourse because this article was written to agitate people to talk about it but not to create any chaos. The injunction simply prevents it.”

They argued that if the case was limited to a private person, then the comments could not be made but if he or she was connected with a public figure, business related to rise or fall will be commented upon by people.

Jay Shah’s lawyer, senior counsel Nirupam Nanavati, on the other hand, argued that the trial court had prima facie held that dragging Prime Minister in the write-up was not right. He argued: “Connecting my father’s position and Prime Minister so to tell the world that I (Jay) enhanced my business because of these connections can never said to be an honest opinion and the burden of proving that it is not defamatory is on respondents (portal). Assuming that whatever they collected from the record may be true but can you publish in this manner in the name of public interest? The language and the innuendo used don’t say their article is an honest opinion but only to malign me and my father and the Prime Minister. The trial court found that the PM was wrongly involved so the portal was restrained.”

Earlier, on Jan 8, the Gujarat High Court had also rejected the petition of the website The Wire seeking quashing of a criminal defamation case lodged against it by Jay Shah, son of BJP president Amit Shah.

The court held that there is a prima facie case against Wire’s reporter and editors. The court held that “the most disturbing part of the article”, which can be “prima facie termed as defamatory”, is linking the rise in Jay’s firm’s turnover with the election of Narendra Modi as Prime Minister.

Justice JB Pardiwala said: “The most disturbing part of the article, or to put it in other words, the imputation which could be termed as prima facie defamatory is the averment that the turnover of the company owned by the complainant, who happens to be the son of the leader of the Bhartiya Janta Party increased 16,000 times over in the year following the election of Narendra Modi as the Prime Minister and the elevation of his father to the post of the party president.”

The Wire had moved the High Court against the criminal defamation case filed by Jay before a metropolitan court, days after the website put up the article “The Golden Touch of Jay Amit Shah”, alleging that his company’s turnover grew exponentially after the BJP came to power in 2014. The Wire had said its report is based on documentary evidence and hence they cannot be tried for criminal defamation.

Saying that there is a prima facie case against the petitioner, Justice Pardiwala observed, “What is important is the strong innuendo that the complainant has prospered because of the fact that he happens to be the son of a very powerful political leader, and that too, at a point of time when Narendra Modi took over as the Prime Minister of the country.”

The judgment said, “…prima facie, the article tries to portray a picture that an ordinary company, which had a meagre revenue of Rs 50,000/- proceeded to accumulate the revenue of Rs 80,00,00,000/- [Rs 80 crore] in a single year…only because of the political position of the father of the complainant and at a time when Narendra Modi took over as the Prime Minister.”

Justice Pardiwala also raised the question about what the effect of such an article would be in the mind of a common man. He observed that “in a country like India, it does not take a second for the people in general to start thinking that the complainant has prospered only because of his political contacts. People may even infer corrupt practice at the end of the complainant. In such circumstances, the article published by the writ applicants, prima facie, could be termed as defamatory in nature.”

Justice Pardiwala had also refused to grant relief to founding editors of the website since there are “specific and clear allegations in the complaint that they are responsible for the defamatory matter and had the personal knowledge about the contents of the defamatory matter”.

The entire issue is likely to be taken to the Supreme Court by The Wire.

India News

Two election commissioners complained against senior poll officer, RTI reveals

An RTI response has shed light on complaints by two Election Commissioners against a senior poll panel officer and the Cabinet Secretariat’s decision not to intervene directly.

Published

on

An RTI response has brought fresh details to light about complaints submitted by two Election Commissioners against a senior official of the Election Commission of India (ECI), including the Cabinet Secretariat’s decision not to intervene directly in the matter.

Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi wrote separate letters to Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan on July 29, 2026, raising concerns about the working of Senior Deputy Election Commissioner Maneesh Garg.

The complaints followed an order concerning the allocation of responsibilities among senior officers in the poll panel. The Cabinet Secretariat subsequently acknowledged the communications and shared them with relevant offices, while noting that direct action could be inappropriate without an official communication from the Commission as a whole.

Why the two Election Commissioners raised concerns

The dispute centred on a work-allocation order issued on July 28, when Garg took temporary charge as the link officer for the Deputy Election Commissioner handling administration, who was on leave.

According to the complaints, Garg issued an order reallocating responsibilities among senior and equivalent-ranking officers without discussing the changes with the Commission or the officers concerned.

Sandhu reportedly objected that the revised allocation had been made without consultation, while Joshi stated that a file he requested from the Administration Division was not provided to him.

The two Commissioners also referred to previous instructions against making such changes without prior discussion or approval from the Commission.

Why the Cabinet Secretariat did not intervene

Records disclosed through the RTI process indicate that the Cabinet Secretariat considered the complaints but concluded that direct intervention could be inappropriate.

In its internal deliberations, the Secretariat noted that the Election Commission is a constitutional body designed to function independently of executive interference. It also observed that the letters had been sent by the two Commissioners in their individual capacities rather than as an official communication from the Commission collectively.

The Secretariat therefore considered it appropriate to acknowledge the letters and inform the Chief Election Commissioner’s office, rather than take direct action against the official.

The Department of Personnel and Training was also informed so that the matter could be placed on record for future consideration concerning the officer.

What happened after the complaints

The Cabinet Secretariat’s records show that internal discussions took place on August 3 and August 4. The Cabinet Secretary acknowledged the two letters on August 5 and forwarded the matter to the relevant offices.

The Election Commission had also issued a clarification on September 26, stating that the dispute did not concern a policy matter or the Commission’s IT division, but the functioning of an officer posted to the poll panel.

The Commission said the work-reallocation orders were not implemented following directions from the two Commissioners and that oversight of the IT division had not actually been withdrawn.

The RTI disclosures provide an official record of how the complaints were handled by the Cabinet Secretariat, while also highlighting the institutional considerations involved in deciding whether the executive should intervene in the functioning of a constitutional body.

Continue Reading

India News

Punjab strike hits public services as 3 lakh employees and roadways workers protest

Punjab is facing disruption to government work and public transport as over three lakh government employees participate in a mass leave protest and roadways workers continue their strike over pending demands.

Published

on

Public services in Punjab have been affected as government employees and transport workers continue their agitation over long-pending demands. The protests involve a mass casual leave programme by more than three lakh government employees and a separate strike by workers associated with state-run transport services.

The agitation has disrupted government office operations and public bus services, adding to the pressure on the Punjab government to address employees’ grievances.

Why Punjab government employees are protesting

Government employees have been pressing for the release of pending dearness allowance (DA) instalments and arrears, restoration of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), regularisation of contractual workers and resolution of pay-related issues.

The demands also cover service conditions and benefits for workers employed across different government departments. Employee organisations have called for concrete decisions on these matters, arguing that several issues remain unresolved despite discussions with the state government.

The mass casual leave programme has affected the functioning of government offices and administrative establishments across the state.

Roadways workers’ strike affects bus services

Separately, workers associated with Punjab Roadways, PUNBUS and the Punjab Road Transport Corporation (PRTC) have continued their agitation over employment-related demands.

The transport workers’ protest has affected the availability of public buses, creating difficulties for commuters who depend on state-run services for their daily travel.

The transport workers’ demands include regularisation under applicable service rules, changes to employment arrangements for outsourced workers and action on cases linked to previous protests.

The government employees’ agitation and the transport workers’ strike are separate actions, although both concern outstanding demands and the state government’s response to employee organisations.

Talks fail to resolve the deadlock

Discussions between employee representatives and the state government have so far failed to produce a comprehensive resolution to the dispute.

Employee organisations have continued to seek assurances and concrete action on their demands. The continuation of the agitation reflects the lack of an agreement that would persuade the protesting groups to withdraw their actions.

The dispute has also placed the state government under pressure to restore normal public services while addressing the concerns raised by government staff and transport workers.

Continue Reading

India News

Amit Shah says congress won’t return to power for 30 years

Union Home Minister Amit Shah took a swipe at Rahul Gandhi over the Opposition’s vote theft allegations, asserting that the Congress would not return to power for the next 30 years.

Published

on

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday launched a fresh attack on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, questioning the Opposition’s allegations of vote theft and asserting that the Congress would not return to power for the next 30 years.

Addressing an event in New Delhi, Shah criticised Gandhi over his absence from the country and challenged the Congress’s objections to the Election Commission of India (ECI), arguing that the party accepted the electoral process when it won elections but questioned it after defeats.

The remarks came during an event related to projects for the rejuvenation of the Yamuna, where Shah also targeted the Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) over their political record in Delhi.

Amit Shah’s warning to Rahul Gandhi

Taking a dig at Gandhi over his reported foreign visit, Shah said the Congress leader would have to remember his words when he returned to Delhi.

The Home Minister argued that the Congress’s political setbacks had begun long before Narendra Modi became Prime Minister and said the party could not attribute its electoral losses solely to allegations of irregularities in elections.

Shah also defended his confidence in the BJP’s electoral prospects, contrasting his prediction of the party remaining in power with the Congress’s prospects under its current political approach.

He asserted that the Congress would not get another opportunity to form a government for the next 30 years. The statement was a political prediction made by Shah, rather than an established electoral outcome.

Shah questions Congress over vote theft allegations

Shah accused the Congress and other Opposition parties of adopting inconsistent positions on the Election Commission, depending on whether election results favoured them.

Citing electoral victories in states including Kerala, Telangana and Himachal Pradesh, he argued that the Congress and its allies had accepted the electoral process when they won.

He questioned why the same institutions and electoral arrangements became subjects of criticism when the Opposition lost elections.

Shah also targeted the Opposition’s protests against alleged electoral irregularities and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. He alleged that the Congress was using vote theft claims to protect the votes of infiltrators.

These were allegations made by the Home Minister and should be understood as his political assertions, not as independently established findings.

Amit Shah targets Opposition’s protest strategy

The Home Minister also criticised the Opposition’s demonstrations in Delhi, arguing that protests could not overturn the public mandate.

He said political parties seeking electoral victories should engage with people and address their concerns rather than rely on demonstrations and allegations against constitutional institutions.

Shah further accused the Opposition of applying different standards to court decisions, suggesting that it welcomed judgments in its favour while questioning those that went against it.

His remarks came amid continuing political disagreements over the electoral process and the Opposition’s criticism of the Election Commission.

Yamuna projects and attack on AAP

During the same event, Shah inaugurated and laid the foundation stones for 43 Delhi Jal Board projects worth Rs. 8,941 crore, aimed at improving wastewater treatment, drinking water infrastructure and the rejuvenation of the Yamuna.

He criticised previous governments in Delhi over the river’s pollution and accused the Congress and AAP of failing to address the problem adequately.

Shah also targeted AAP national convenor Arvind Kejriwal, arguing that political parties should be judged by their performance rather than their explanations for failing to deliver results.

He said the BJP would work towards cleaning the Yamuna and improving water and sewerage infrastructure in the national capital.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com