Inquiry Committee Meeting Held on 19-20 June, 2017 at New Delhi

Press Council of India

Adjudications rendered by the Council in its Meeting held on 21.09.2017 at New Delhi,

Complaints by the Press Section-14

Inquiry Committee meeting held on 19-20 June, 2017 at New Delhi

1. Complaint of Shri Baldev Singh against the editor, Hindustan Times, Chandigarh. (14/478/16-17-PCI) 2. Complaint of Shri Raj Kumar Jalan, Haryana against the editor, Punjab Kesari. (14/486/16-17-PCI)

3. Complaint of Shri Subhash Chandra Mishra, Sant Kabir Nagar, Uttar Pradesh against the editor, Amar Ujala, Uttar Pradesh. (14/396/16-17-PCI)

4. Complaint of Shri Avdesh Mishra, Farrukhabad, UP against the Editor, Youth India. (14/387/16-17- PCI) CENSURE

5. Complaint of Shri Mohd. Nasir, Shamli, UP against the Editor, Amar Ujala. (14/503/16-17-PCI)

6. Complaint of Shri Sanser Pal Singh, Delhi against the editor, Nav Bharat Times. (14/482/16-17-PCI)

7. Complaint of Shri Anilbhai Danjibhai Parmar against the Editor, Navkar Weekly, Gujarat. (14/269/16- 17-PCI)

8. Complaint of Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Kohli, Advisor-PR, The Kalgidhar Trust, Baru Sahib against the editor, Rozana Pahredar, Punjab. (14/406/16-17-PCI) CENSURE

9. Complaint of Shri Dev Ashish Bhattacharya, UP against the editor, The Hindu. (14/290/16-17-PCI)

10. Complaint of Shri Dalbir Singh Bisht, Gurugraml, Haryana against the editor, Punjab Kesari, New Delhi. (14/510/16-17-PCI.)

11. Complaint of General Secretary, Trade Union Coordination Centre, Central Committee, New Delhi against the editors Aami Assomer Janagan, Amar Asom and Agradoot. (14/360-362/16-17/PCI)

12. Complaint of Shri G. Prasada Rao, GM-Corporate Communications, Air India Ltd., New Delhi against the editor, Union Territory Independent. (14/380/16-17-PCI)

13. Complaint of Shri Arvind Rajvedi, Director (काम िमक एव व◌ं शासन), Pashimanchal Power Distribution Corporation Ltd., Meerut, UP against the Editor, Vishav Prikrama Times. (14/491/16-17-PCI) CENSURE

14. Reference received from Election Commission of India, New Delhi against the Editor, Bijnor Times, Bijnor, UP. (14/899/14-15-PCI) CENSURE

15. Complaint of Shri Mohd. Khalid, Advocate on behalf of Shri Pramod Kumar Singh Chauhan against the editor, Dainik Jagran. (14/363/16-17-PCI)

16. Complaint of Ms. Priydarshani Yadav, Jharkhand against the Editor, Aawaj, Dhanbad, Jharkhand. (14/422/16-17-PCI)

INQUIRY COMMITTEE-I SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 12 JULY, 2017 AT NEW DELHI

17. Complaint of Ms. Rashmi, Chandigarh against the Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Chandigarh. (14/680/14-15). CENSURE

18. Complaint of Smt. Seema Chouhan, President, Matra Shakti Sangathan, Siwani against the editor, Hind Gazette, Siwani. (DEFERRED)

19. Complaint of Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, UP against the Editor, the Times of India, Agra. (14/338/16- 17).

20. Complaint of Human Rights Protection Forum, Chandigrah, against the editor Dainik Savera Times, Jalandhar. (14/596/15-16).

21. Complaint of Shri Satya Naryan Prasad, New Delhi against the Editor, Rashtriya Sahara, New Delhi. (14/303/16-17). 22. Compliant of Shri Loknath Behera, IPS, Kerala against the Editor Mangalam Kerala . (14/137/16-17)

23. Complaint of Ms. Vandana Nigam against the Editor, Sajag Samachar Parivartan Ka (Hindi), the Aryavarth Express (English) and Parivartan Prabha (Kannada). (14/633-635/15-16)

24. Complaint of the Director, Chetna School of Nursing, Jind, Haryana against the Editor, Dainik Jagarn. (Nr). (14/298/2016-17). 25. Complaint of Shri Dinesh Chander, New Delhi against the editor, Hindustan, New Delhi. (14/427/16-17). 26. Complaint of Smt. Arti Agarwal, M.P. against the editor, Semariya Express, M.P. (14/549/16- 17).CENSURE

27. Shri Hariom Gupta, Satna, M.P. against the editor, Semariya Express. ( 14/415/16-17). CENSURE

28. Complaint of Shri Navin Gupta, Chandigarh against the Editor, Nagar Vaani, Chandigarh. (14/286/14-15)

29. Complaint of Ms. P.A. Lucia, Advocate, Tamil Nadu against the Editor, Dinakaran, Tamil Daily Newspaper. (14/292/16-17). 30. Complaint of Shri Shivnath Ram, Jharkhand against the editor, Hindustan. (14/433/16-17).

31. Complaint of Shri Ved Prakash, Secretary, Distt. Gurgaon, Haryana against the Editor, Dainik Tribune, Chandigarh . (14/496/16-17).

32. Complaint of Ms. Sangeeta Kumari, Ministry I&B, New Delhi against the Editor, Punjab Kesari & Raftaar. (14/44-45/17-18) .

33. Complaint of Shri Bijendra Sharma, Muzaffarnagar, UP against The Editor, Hind Darshan, Muzaffarnagar. (14/453/16-17)

THE MEETING OF THE INQUIRY COMMITTEE-II SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 16 AUGUST, 2017 AT AHEMDABAD, GUJARAT

34. Complaint of Sri Surendra Kumar Jain, Harda against the Editor, Dainik Jagran, MP. (14/328/16-17). CENSURE 35. Complaint of Shri C.S. Chauhan, State President, Rajasthan Rawat Rajput, Rajasthan against the editor, Rawat Rajput Sandhesh. (14/39/17-18).

36. Complaint of Shri Pramod Sahu, Mahu, MP against the Editor, Pariwarik Dastak, Indore. (14/421/16-17).

37. Compliant of Shri Ram Prasad Patel, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh against the Editor, Hari Bhumi, Govindpur, Madhya Pradesh. (14/548/16-17). 38. Complaint of Prof. S.K Jain, Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi Technical University against Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Dwarka Sadan, Bhopal, M.P. (14/509/16-17 ) . CENSURE

39. Complaint of Shri Vijay Trimbak Gokhale, Mumbai against the Editor, Loksatta, Maharashtra and Thomson Reuter (I) Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai-400013. (14/579/16-17). Rejoinder filed by the Complainant in respect of 39-40*.

40. Complaint of Shri. Vijay Trimbak Gokhale, Mumbai against the Editor, Loksatta, Navi Mumbai-400 710. (14/586/16-17). 41. Complaint of Shri. B.L, Jatav, Jabalpur, M.P against The Editor, Chambal Chetna, Gwalior, M.P. (14/570/16-17) . CENSURE

42. Complaint of Shri Rup Lal Sharma, and Shri Narender Singh Bhati, Rajasthan against the Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Rajasthan. (14/50/17-18).

43. Complaint of Shri Ajay M. Marathe, Navi Mumbai against the Editor, Indian Express, Mumbai. (14/578/16-17).

44. Complaint of Adv. Jayant Anandrao Balugade, Kolhapur against the editor, Dainik Mahasatta, Kolhapur . (14/501/16-17).

45. Complaint of Shri. Vakiluddin Zahiruddin Ansari, Gujarat against the Editor, The National Crime News, Gujarat. (14/376/16-17).

46. Complaint of Shri Swamy A.D. Tirth, Central Prison, Navi, Mumbai-410 210 against the The Editor, Mumbai Mirror, Times of India Building, Mumbai-400 001. (14/571/16-17).

47. Complaint of Dr. Vinod K. Jain, Rajasthan against the Editors, (I) Dainik Bhaskar Gujarat Edition, (II) Dainik Bhaskar Jaipur Edition, (III) Shekhawati Bhaskar Sikar Edition and(IV) Dainik Bhaskar, SikarEdition, Rajasthan. (14/40-43/17-18). 48. 48. Press Council of India

SI. NO. 1 F.NO. 14/478/16-17-PCI

Complainant Respondent Shri Baldev Singh, The Editor Kapurthala, Hindustan Times, Punjab. Chandigarh. Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 30.11.2016 has been filed by Shri Baldev Singh, Kapurthala, Punjab, against the Hindustan Times, Chandigarh. According to the complainant the Hindustan Times in its issue dated 28.10.2016 published a report captioned “Punjab lives with a troubled legacy”. On which the complainant had sent an email/rejoinder to the respondent Editor to publish the same in the newspaper. In this connection, the respondent on 3.11.2016 published six letters/rejoinder of others readers but complainant’s letter was not published. Being aggrieved at the arbitrary and discriminatory act of the newspaper, the complainant had sent several reminders including a notice to the editor of the respondent newspaper on 11.11.2016 but still his letter remained unpublished. The complainant has also informed in his complaint that the respondent newspaper had acted illegally and unethically by allowing an IB officer Shri M.K. Dhar to work as a press reporter from 1980 to 1992 at Amritsar and a copy of an article authored by Shri Dhar has also been enclosed for reference. The complainant has pleaded the Council to take necessary action in accordance to the law against the respondent newspaper. In another letter dated 8.2.2017, the complainant has reinstated his earlier submission that six rejoinders from other writers on the same subject was published by the newspaper but alleges that his letter was deliberately not published by the newspaper as it shared facts based on history. He has, therefore, requested the Council to take appropriate action in the matter and has added that the matter deals with the state of Punjab and the entire Sikh community.

Reply Filed by the Respondent A Notice for comments dated 21.3.2017 was issued to the respondent Editor. A written submission dated 30.03.2017 was received which states that the article in question , headlined ‘Punjab lives with a troubled legacy’, was first of a seven- part series on 50th anniversary of re-organisation of Punjab and creation of Haryana as a new state. The respondent editor stated that the complainant in his letter/rejoinder had not pointed out any factual inaccuracy in the said article. The complainant has quoted two books of historians which were beyond the scope of the said article and the complainant himself was neither quoted or mentioned as a stake- holder on the subject of the article. In addition, the respondent editor submitted that he receives many letters in response to write-ups published in their daily but due to space constraints only few letters are selected for publication based on quality and relevance of argument made therein and publishing a reader’s letter is an editorial discretion. In context of the compliant, the complainant’s letter was not published because it made no cogent comment or added any fresh perspective to the subject of article and all it had, was the quotes of two historians and as the newspaper had no means to verify the content/quotes of the history books referred in the complainant’s rejoinder and hence it was not published. However, the respondent editor has submitted that the complainant had not disclosed another fact that several of his letters to the editor have been published regularly in the Hindustan Times. In response to another accusation of the complainant that an IB Officer had worked as a reporter at the Hindustan Times in past has nothing to do with him as he had joined the Hindustan Times in 2009. With these submissions the respondent editor has clarified that the accusation of the complainant against HT and the editor of ‘arbitrary and discriminatory act’ has no professional, ethical or legal ground. Counter comments The complainant in his counter comments dated 1.5.2017 submitted that his rejoinder perfectly fits into the context of the article published on 28.10.2016 which reveals some important historical and political facts of Punjab and formation of another state Haryana. The complainant has submitted that he himself is a research scholar on Punjab and Sikhs and has authored and edited books related to Punjab and Sikhs and his letter shared some important facts of the history of Punjab authored by historians like Shri Durga Das and Dr. JS Garewal which the editor had not published. In last, he has submitted that in view of the submitted facts, documentary proof and submissions, the complainant has pleaded the Council to ask the editor to publish his rejoinder so that people may know the true facts related to Punjab. Report of Inquiry Committee The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 20.06.2017 at New Delhi. No one has appeared for the complainant. Shri Arun Pathak , Adovocate appeared for the respondent. The complainant has not chosen to appear. He has filed an application inter- alia praying for deciding the case on merit. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, written statement and all other connected papers. The respondent newspaper came out with the story with the Headlines “Punjab lives with a trouble legacy”. The complainant sent several letters in response to the said story and his grievance is that although letters written by other readers have been published, but his letter was not chosen for publication. The Inquiry Committee refers to norms 15(c) laid down by the complaint that the editor, with ample discretion exercised bonafide. It reads “Letters to Editor, an Editor who decides to open his columns for letters on a controversial subject, is not obliged to publish all the letters received in regard to that subject. He is entitled to select and publish only some of them either in entirety or the gist thereof. However, in exercising this discretion, he must make an honest endeavour to ensure that what is published is not one-sided but represents a fair balance between the views for an against with respect to the principal issue in controversy”. The Inquiry Committee finds no merit in the grievance of the complainant and accordingly, recommends for its dismissal. Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dismiss the complaint. Press Council of India

SI. NO. 2 F.NO. 14/486/16-17-PCI

Complainant Respondent Shri Raj Kumar Jalan, The Editor House No. 140,E-Block Punjab Kesari, Sirsa Haryana. Civil Lines, Pucca Bagh, Jalandhar, Punjab.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 27.12.2016 has been filed by Shri Raj Kumar Jalan, Sirsa against “Punjab Kesari” alleging publication of false, misleading and defamatory news item under the caption: “Sirsa club mein Niyamo ki dhajjiyan uda rhe safedposh” in its issue dated 21.12.2016. It was reported in the impugned news item that Sirsa club,s system has badly collapsed as there has been gross violation of reputation. Thereby its prestige has gone down. It was further reported that the complainant, who is a member of the club, is largely responsible for it.

Denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news item, the complainant alleged that the respondent deliberately published false and misleading news item with a view to tarnish his image in the society. The complainant submitted that he issued a legal notice dated 20.11.2016 to the respondent, requesting him to withdraw the defamatory news item by printing a corrigendum in the newspaper and also tender an apology in writing, but received no response.

Written Statement

In response to Show Cause notice dated 07.02.2017, the respondent, Shri R.S.Jolly, Editor, Punjab Kesari, Haryana vide written statement dated 14.03.2017 while denying the allegations of the complainant has submitted that the impugned news item in question is mere a commentary about the working of the Sirsa club and the mismanagement of the functioning of club. And to be published the public commentary.

Response from complainant

The complainant, Shri Raj Kumar Jalan vide his email dated 12.06.2017 has submitted that he does not want to pursue the matter as his grievances will be redressed by Panchayat. Therefore, he has requested to withdraw the complaint Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 20.06.2017 at New Delhi. Neither the complainant nor the respondent has chosen to appear.

An application has been filed by the complainant inter alia stating that he does not want to pursue the complaint and has sought permission to withdraw the same. The Inquiry Committee accedes to his prayer and dismisses the complaint as withdrawn.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dismiss the complaint. Press Council of India

SI. NO. 3 F.NO. 14/396/16-17-PCI Complainant Respondent Shri Subhas Chandra Mishra 1. The Editor PrathamikVidyalayaTadhbariya Amar Ujala Publication Ltd. JanpathSantKabir Nagar. Gorakhpur, UP.

2. The Editor Amar Ujala Publication Ltd. Noida, UP.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 2.11.2016 has been filed by Shri Subhas Chandra Mishra, Prathamik Vidyalaya Tadhbariya, Janpad Sant Kabir Nagar, against the editor of Amar Ujala Publication Ltd. alleging publication of imaginary and misleading news item in its issue dated 6.8.2016 captioned “Pradhan and Head Master ka Vivad Suljha”. The alleged impugned news item talks about the dispute between the Gram Pradhan and the Pradhan Adhyapak of Prathamik Vidyalaya, Tadhbariya over the issue of preparation of mid-day meal, which resulted the discontinuance of mid-day meal in the school for a month and only after the intervention of the DC MDM, the mid-day meal was re-started. The Principal (Complainant) has alleged that Gram Pradhan has not been cooperating in preparation of mid-day meal whereas the Pradhan Shri. J.P Mishra states that he has been regularly cooperating with the principal. The complainant has submitted that since, it is the responsibility of Gram Pradhan to get the mid meal prepared, he is being involved without any reason. The complainant has also informed that he wrote to the respondent editor vide its letter dated 26.08.2016 for clarification but did not receive any response.

Reply Filed by the Respondent

In response to the Show Cause notice dated 23.2.2017 the respondent newspaper vide its written statement dated 28.03.2017 denied the allegations of the complainant has submitted that alleged impugned news item was published in good faith without any malicious intent in the public interest. The object of the publication was to make the general public aware about the incident happening in the society and not to defame anyone. The respondent editor had also submitted that they have no personal grudge or vendetta against the complainant and stated that the present complaint is not maintainable.

Counter comments

A counter comment dated 2.05.2016 was received from the complainant stating that the news has damaged his social reputation. Report of Inquiry Committee

The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 20.06.2017 at New Delhi. No one has appeared for the complainant. Shri Amit Kumar Choudhary, Deputy Manager, appeared for the respondent.

Despite service of notice, nobody has appeared on behalf of the complainant, the respondent is represented. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, the reply and all other connected papers and is of the opinion that the respondent newspaper has not committed any breach of journalistic ethics so as to call for action by the Press Council.

The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint.

Shri Awdhesh Mishra, Advocate, The Editor, R/o Paliwali Gali, Youth India, Baber Road Bholepur Fatehgarh, Farukhabad, Distt. Farukhabad, U.P. Uttar Pradesh

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 24.10.2016 has been filed by Shri Awdhesh Mishra, Advocate, Farukhabad, U.P. against the editor, Youth India for publishing false, factless, baseless and defamatory news items in its various issues mentioned below:- Police ke kukhyat dalal tantric avdesh mishra ne avaidh kamai se 5.11.2016 nawabganj mein 40 beegha zameen kharid li. Beimaani se paise se degree college banana ka tana bana bunna shuru kiya hai. Tantric ne najaane kitne logo ko thagi ka shikaar banaya.

Tantric ke sang daroga ne duty chod ardh raatri mein masani 3.11.2016 chinta par damru bajaya. Kursi khisakti dekh daroga ne apne tantric guru dalal ki sharan li.

Bin byahi maa ke navjaat shishu ki bali ki tayaari mein tantric 1.11.2016 vakeel avdesh mishra, diwali ki raat masani takat ko chadai bakre ki bali, pareva ke din sathiyo sang khaya maans.

Chhalal tantric avdesh mishra ne apne guru indrapal urf tota ram 30.10.2016 jatav se seeekha kala jadu. Jis makaan ka banaya niwas uski malkin aaj tak gayab.

Ucch nayalayaya ka aadesh na mane par tula pariya aur tantric 27.10.2016 dalal vakeel avdhe. Vidwaano mein rosh ki lahar. Bar council adyaksh par tantra ki vidhya karne par tantric vakeel aaj pit te-pit te bacha, kachheri se jaan bacha kar bhaga.

Tantric dalal ne patni ko banaya thagai ki taal jahan khud hota 26.102016 asafal waha biwi ko aage kar banata kaam.

Tantric avdesh mishra ne purva S.P. ke khilaaf shadyantra mein jute 24.10.2016 avaidh portal sanchalak ka liya sahara.

Dalal khukyat tantric ke ghar jaane wale police karmiyo par 23.10.2016 nigrani shuru. Ilakai logo ne vakeel ke ghar aana jaana kiya band, kaha kar leta hai vashibhoot.

Vakeel sanjeev pariya ke ishkbaaz gurgo ne vaar association ko 12.9.2016 bana dala ayyashi ka adda. Sham dhalne ke baad pariya ke gurge rangraliya manane pahuchte hai

Police ke dalal vakeel avdesh mishra ne ab CO City ko shuru kiya 31.8.2016 bechna. Nagar shetradhikari ke karyalaya ke chakkar laga kar logo ko bhramit karne ki shuru ki shajish.

Police ke khukhyat dalal vakeel avdesh ki patni ke khauf se pidit ab 15.5.2016 veva ko dhamkane mein juti hai. 2 lakh ki rangdari maangne mein juti vakeel ki patni ke khauf se pidit parivaar ka jeena dhurbhar hai. Dhamki de rahi hai ki mera pati hi IG, DIG aur Judge hai, jo chahte hai vehe karte hai.

The complainant alleged that the respondent is a notorious person having criminal character and dozens of cases are pending against him in court. An arrest warrant has also been issued against him followed by an action of kurki. The complainant further submitted that he is advocate in a case against respondent editor. He alleged that respondent has pressurised him many times asking him not to appear as advocate in the cases against him. When the complainant did not succumb to pressure, the respondent published series of news against him and his wife using filthy languages. The complainant vide legal notice dated 21.3.2015 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news reports but received no reply. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor, Youth India, U.P. on 6.12.2016.

Written Statement

In response, the respondent editor vide its undated written statement submitted that the report was published on the basis of press release received against the complainant and not out of any enmity with him. He further stated that paper has never published news against his wife.The respondent referred to his earlier complaint filed by him against the complainant in the Council (F.N.13/179/14-15), stating that he did not get justice and the complainant and his accomplices are still harassing him.

Counter comments

The complainant vide letter dated 10.1.2017 while reiterating his complaint submitted that the impugned news report are false, manipulated and published without taking his version or proof.

Vide his further letter dated 29.01.2017, plaint the reiterating his complainant, has stated that the respondent reply is illegal and based on false facts. He has further stated that his version was never published and the impugned news items published against him are baseless.

Further Comments from the Respondent

The respondent in his letter dated 20.6.2017 has submitted that the allegations levelled by the complainant in his reply are absolutely false and baseless. He further stated that the cases filed against him by the complainant are false. He alleged that the complainant is a blackmailer and a broker of police. He has stated that he always follow the norms of journalist conduct and requested the Council to take necessary action in the matter. Report of the Inquiry Committee Following an adjournment dated 11.4.2017, the matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 20.6.2017 at New Delhi. Shri Avdesh Mishra, the complainant appeared in person. Shri Tausif Khan, Reporter appeared for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and has perused the complaint, the written statement and other connected papers. The respondent has also filed another reply today through Shri Tausif Khan. The respondent newspaper has published series of news items against the complainant. It is the allegation of the complainant that the contents of the news item are false and concocted. The respondent in his written statement has stated that those are published on the basis of Press Releases received against him. The respondent has not placed on record those Press Releases. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the respondent has published the impugned news to malign the complainant and that too without any basis. Further, no opportunity was given to the complainant to give his version. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion on perusal & impugned publication couched in undesirable langauge that the respondent newspaper has violated the code of journalistic ethics and deserves to be Censured. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends to the Council to Censure the respondent newspaper, Youth India, Farukhabad, U.P.

Held

The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Censure the respondent newspaper, Youth India, Farukhabad, U.P. A copy of this order be forwarded to the Director, Information & Public Relations Department of Government of U.P., the Director General, DAVP, the District Magistrate, Farukhabad, U.P. and the District Magistrate, Lucknow, U.P. for appropriate action. PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

Sl. No. 5 F.No.14/503/16-17-PCI

Md. Nasir, The Editor, Shamli, Uttar Pradesh. Amar Ujala, Noida.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 28.2.2017 has been filed by Md. Nasir, Shamli, U.P. against the editor, Amar Ujala, Noida alleging publication of misleading a news item in its issue dated 22.1.2017 under the caption “पा वंचवव दिदन खखला न◌ा िम ◌ा वंकन क◌ा खा त◌ा ”. It is reported in the impugned news item that Md. Nasir Ali filed his nomination as BSP candidate from Bantikheda under the Thanabhawan constituency along with his advocates and others. The complainant submitted that he is a candidate of Bahujan Mukti Party not Bahujan Samajwadi Party . The respondent in his news item wrongly mentioned that he has filed his nomination as a Bahujan Samajwadi Party candidate. He has submitted that publication of false news has lowered his image in the society and has caused him immense mental agony and damaged his election prospects. The complainant vide letter dated 22.1.2017 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned publication and requested him to publish contradiction of the same, but received no response.

The complainant vide another letter dated 28.2.2017 informed the Council that the respondent published another misleading news regarding another candidate Shri Sandeep Kumar who has filed his nomination as a candidate of Bahujan Mukti Party, but the respondent mentioned him as an independent candidate. Similarly, in news item dated 25.1.2017, the respondent published that Shri Arvind Kuamr filed his nomination as a candidate of Bahuijan Mukti Morcha instead of Bahujan Mukti Party, thereby placing wrong facts before the general public and harmed the winning prospects of the candidates of his party. The complainant submitted that he drew the attention of the respondent towards the same on 28.2.2017, but received no response. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent Editor, Amar Ujala, Noida on 23.3.2017. Written Statement The respondent in his written statement dated 7.6.2017 has stated that the publication of news item is neither objectionable nor the newspaper or editor has offended against the standards of journalistic ethics or public taste nor the editor has committed any professional misconduct. He has further stated that the impugned news item was published inadvertently without any ulterior motive against the complainant. He has submitted that after receiving the complainant’s legal notice dated 22.1.2017, they published the corrigendum in the newspaper on 29.1.2017 with the caption “ Nasir Ali Choudhary Bamupa Ke Pratyashi ” and thereafter a reply dated 3.2.2017 was also sent to the complainant. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 20.6.2017 at New Delhi. Mohd. Nasir, District President and Ex-MLA along with his advocate, Shri Rajesh Kumar appeared for the complainant. Shri Amit Kumar Choudhary, Deputy Manager appeared for the respondent. ‘ The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and the representative of the respondent. It is the grievance of the complainant that he was the candidate of the Bahujan Mukti Party but the respondent newspaper in its issue dated 21.2.2017 described him as a candidate of Bahujan Samaj Party thereby adversely impacting his election prospects. The respondent in his reply has not denied this fact and according to the newspaper it was an inadvertent error. Further, the plea of the respondent is that when it came to his notice, the newspaper issued a corrigendum on 29.1.2017 stating that the complainant is a candidate of Bahujan Mukti Party. The election was to be held on 11 th February, 2017. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the respondent newspaper while covering the news of election ought to have been more careful. The complainant admittedly was a candidate from Bahujan Mukti Party but shown as the candidate of Bahujan Samaj Party. Noting that the corrigendum was published well before the date of election, the Inquiry Committee stresses that a little care on part of the respondent would have avoided this confusion. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends to the Council for disposal of the complaint with an observation that the respondent should be careful in future in such matter.

Sanser Pal Singh, The Editor, Delhi. Nav Bharat Times, New Delhi.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 11.1.2017 has been filed by Shri Sanser Pal Singh, Delhi against the Editor, Nav Bharat Times, Delhi for publication of a news item under the caption “James Bond Ka Pan Bahar Wala Ad Ban” in its issue dated 17.10.2016. It is reported in the news item that the Advertisment of Pan Bahar Masala a mouth freshner which Pierce Brosnan @ James Bond had presented, has been banned. It is further reported in the impugned news item that the Chairman of CBFC has imposed ban on the said advertisement. The complainant stated that he has filed an RTI application before CBFC seeking information on the said ban and in reply thereto the PIO of CBFC denied any ban imposed on the said advertisement. The complainant vide e-mail dated 26.12.2016 drew the attention of the respondent regarding authenticity of the said news but no reply was received. The complainant again on 28.12.2016 send an e-mail to the respondent and requested him to verify the news in question but neither the newspaper replied nor published any corrigendum. No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued to the Respondent Editor, Nav Bharat Times, Delhi on 22.2.2017. No written statement has been filed by them. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 19.6.2017 at New Delhi. Shri Sanser Pal Singh, the complainant appeared in person while there was no appearance on behalf of the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and perused the complaint and the papers filed by him. Certain queries have been made to which the complainant states that he is not bound to reply. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the grievance made by the complainant is misconceived and intended to achieve oblique purpose. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends to the Council for dismissal of the complaint.

F. No. 14/269/16-17-PCI

Item no. 7

Shri Anilbhai Danjibhai Parmar, The Editor, B/H Gandhi Hospital, Navakar Weekly, Opp. Kansara Boarding, Surendranagar. Amardeep Park Society, Devi Smruti Surendranagar Adjudication 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 11.08.2016 has been filed by Shri Anilbhai Danjibhai Parmar from Surendranagar against the editor of Navakar Weekly objecting to printing of religious photograph on the front page of their Weekly. The complainant states that he had communicated his objection to the Editor of Navakar Weekly vide his letter dated 26.03.2016 stating that after reading the weekly, any person can use/throw the weekly anywhere, including an impure’ place and thus such ignorant use of religious photo can hurt public sentiment he had requested the editor to remove the religious photograph from their weekly which the respondent has been using as a trademark for their Weekly. The complainant had also informed the respondent that according to the Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgement newspapers are not allowed to use religious photographs or related matters as a trademark of newspapers but no action has been taken by the respondent editor. He has also filed the same complaint before the Registrar of Newspapers India but no action taken has been taken by them. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor on 9.11.2016. Written Statement The respondent in his written statement dated 10.12.2016 stated that the complainant has ‘misunderstood, misinterpreted the provisions of the law. The complainant has wrongly pointed out the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which is not relevant to the fact of this matter’ and submitted that at no point of time the Weekly had used the said photograph as its trademark and “Navakar” is the trademark of the Weekly and this name is not illegal or prohibited under any law. The respondent further submitted that Navkar Weekly has always maintained high traditions of journalistic ethics over the period of time and the photograph which is printed on the front page, that is of Lord Krishna and Arjuna riding on the ,,,,,,,,,, according to the respondent, indicates the pious message of war against injustice and has no intention of making money by using such picture. The Respondent has submitted that their Weekly is very old and hence filing a complaint with such meagre cause states that the complainant is having ill intention to move against the editor of the paper without any substantial evidence. Counter Comments The complainant vide his letter dated 25.12.2016 had referred to another judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India “Lalubabu Priyadarshi vs. Bihar’ in which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has passed an order stating that the desire to get business/benefit under the name and photo of Lord or printing of any religious or related photo on market selling commodities are prohibited and had directed the respondent of that case to remove the picture of Ram-Sita and Laxman from Incense packet and hence as the respondent had been using photograph of Lord Krishna and Arjuna depicting a plot of Mahabharata on the newspapers front page which has religious importance, he should also be directed to remove. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 19.6.2017 at New Delhi. Despite service of notice, the complainant has not chosen to appear. However, he has submitted an application inter-alia stating that he, being a handicapped person, unable to appear before the Inquiry Committee and has prayed that the decision be taken on merit. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, the reply and all other connected papers and is of the opinion that the grievance made by the complainant is misconceived. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends to the Council for dismissal of the complaint.

Held

Sl. No. 8 F.No.14/406/16-17-PCI

Complainant The Kalgidhar Trust, New Delhi.

Respondent The Editor, RozanaPehredar, Jagraon, Punjab.

The Editor, RozanaPehredar, Ludhiana.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 2.11.2016 has been field by the Kalgidhar Trust, New Delhi against the editor, Rozana Pehredar for allegedly publishing of false and defamatory news against the Trust in its issue dated 4.10.2016 under the caption “Festival of Navratri was celebrated at Baru Sahib”(English translation). It is reported in the impugned news item that the Baru Sahib which is in the limelight due to controversies, have now stooped low to dishonour the Sikh principles and the decorum of Shri Akal Takht Sahib, pictures viral on social media shows students performing songs and dance program on stage on this occasion of Navratri with the pictures of Baba Attar Singh Ji. It is further reported in the impugned news item that the trustee of the said Trust blamed how the Trust has now mingled up with RSS and profit earning companies in taking free possession of lands for their selfish gain. It is reported that there was news of detention of a lady for two days after having selflessly served the Gurdwara with two girls who were later on released by sangat of Cheema Sahib. Due to this the local residents took the control of Cheema Sahib Gurdwara and Akal Academy Management. The lady spoke to newspersons several times regarding this and this news got published in various newspapers.

Denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news item the complainant stated that the news report is defamatory and falsely mentions that the Kalgidhar Trust Baru Sahib has stooped low to dishonour the Sikh Principals and decorum of Akal Takht Sahib. The complainant stated that the news regarding detention of a lady for two days is also false and the author has not cared to verify the news, which is a basic ethical requirement. The complainant submitted that no Navratri function has ever been held in the aforesaid school in the past or in the year 2016 and the photograph in question does not even belong to the aforesaid school, and the photographs relate to Akal Nursing College at Baru Sahib. He has also submitted that the function was held during International Nursing Conference, which was held in the presence of the international delegates where the children performed skits for the promotion of the sentiments of religious brotherhood. The complainant further stated that the respondent threw all journalistic standards and ethics to the winds by alleging that the principal of Bathinda Academy did something vulgar which is slanderous and defamatory in nature. The complainant vide legal notice dated 2.11.2016 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news report and requested him to publish apology, but received no response.

No Written Statement

A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor, Rozana Pehredar, Punjab on 9.1.2017. In response to that the respondent vide letter 28.1.2017 informed the Council that due to nervous breakdown from last six months he is unable to reply to the Show Cause Notice and requested the Council to give him minimum one month time for filing the reply, however, no response was received to the date of hearing .

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 19.06.2017 at New Delhi. Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Kohli, Advisor PR, appeared for the complainant and Shri Major Singh, Staff Reporter, appeared for the respondent.

The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant as also the representative of “Rozana pehredar”, Shri Major Singh. By letter dated 28.01.2017, the editor of “Rozana Pehredar”, had asked for one month’s time to file the reply. Till date no reply has been filed. The representative of the respondent again prays for time to file the reply. The Inquiry Committee is not inclined to accede to his prayer.

The Inquiry Committee perused the complaint as also impugned news item. The Inquiry Committee holds that the contents of the news were published without due care/verification and intended to create hatred amongst different communities. It was provocative, acidic and to a great extent intended to create disharmony. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the respondent newspaper while publishing such a news has committed breach of journalistic ethics and deserves to be censured. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends that the respondent newspaper be censured. A copy of the Order be forwarded to the Director, Information & Public Relations, Punjab, Director General of DAVP and District Magistrate, Ludhiana for appropriate action.

Held

Sl. No. 9 F.No.14/290/16-17-PCI

Complainant Shri Dev Ashish Bhattacharya, Noida, UP 201304

Respondent The Editor, The Hindu, Chennai, Tamil Nadu.

Adjudicaiton Dated 21.09.2017

This complaint dated 27.8.2016 has been filed by Shri Dev Ashish Bhattacharya, Kendriya Vihar, Noida, U.P. against the Editor, The Hindu for publication of allegedly misleading, unfounded news item in ‘The Hindu’ on 29.7.2017 captioned “Priyanka need not reveal Himachal land details: HC”. It is reported in the impugned news item that relief to Congress President, Sonia Gandhi’s daughter, Priyanka Vadra, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has ruled that she need not reveal land details or house plans under any RTI. It is also reported in the impugned news item that the court in its verdict said that the RTI activist had no requirement of the information on the land records of Ms. Vadra in Mashobara, Himachal Pradesh.

According to the complainant, the contents of the news item published are totally misleading, unfounded and not at all based on the facts and contents of the order of the High Court. In fact ‘The Hindu’, by quoting the name of the Hon’ble Judge and the High Court has published such a news which has created confusion and suspicion in the mind of the vast number of readers of The Hindu in the country and abroad too.

The complainant vide his mail letter dated 30.7.2016 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news item and requested them to rewrite the news item giving factual details, but received no response.

A Notice for comments dated 16.12.2016, was issued to the respondent newspaper.

Comments of Respondent

In response to the Council’s Notice for comments dated 16.12.2016, Shri Jacob, Senior Managing Editor, The Hindu, Chennai Tamil Nadu vide letter dated 27.12.2016 has filed his comments in which he stated that the complainant, Shri Dev Ashsish Bhattacharya had written to The Hindu soon after the report in question was published on July 29, 2016 and the Readers’ Editor of The Hindu had looked into the matter. Realising that an error had crept into the report from Shimla Correspondent, the Readers’ Editor had effected the publication of a correction/clarification in all editions of The Hindu on August 3, 2016. He has requested the council to decline to entertain the complaint.

Counter Comments:

In response to the comments of the respondent, the complainant vide his counter comments dated 11.01.217 has stated that he is really astonished to see the reaction of the senior functionary of The Hindu on the serious issue. The Hindu management has tried to brush away with contempt the said issue just because on the one side is Smt. Priyanka Gandhi and on the other side is a common citizen of India. In fact, The Hindu chose to spread baseless news giving high edge to Smt. Priyanka Gandhi very prominently, as is evident from the placement of the news item dated 29.07.2016. He further stated that the Senior Managing Editor is trying to wriggle out of the situation by terming it as a routine error and publishing the same without mentioning a single word owning any type of responsibility in their so called clarification. A bare reading of the clarification submitted by The Hindu Management, is indicative of its branch, high headed and audacious attitude which needs to be tackled with iron hands as nobody is above the law. He further submitted that this act of the management clearly, that the news dated 29.07.2016 was published intentionally in collusion with the Higher Management of The Hindu to please Smt. Priyanka Gandhi by spreading unprofessional rumor using its prominent platform.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 20.06.2017 at New Delhi, Shri Dev Ashish Bhattacharya, the complainant appeared in person. Shri S. Ramanujam, Regional General Manager appeared on behalf of the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complaint and the representative of the respondent newspaper. In view of the assurance given by the respondent newspaper that they will come out with further clarification within two weeks, the Committee is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for disposal of the complaint with the direction to send the published clarification to the Council and to the complainant.

Held

The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dispose of the Complaint. Press Council of India Sl. No. 10 File No. 14/510/16-17-PCI. Complainant Respondents Shri Dalbir Singh Bisht, The Editor, DLF Phase-2, Punjab Kesari, Gurugram-122002, Ring Road, Haryana. DelHI -110 035

Adjudication Dated 21.09.2017

This complaint dated 14.2.2017 has been filed by Shri Dalbir Singh Bisht, Gurgaon, Haryana against the editor, Punjab Kesari, New Delhi alleging publication of unverified, false, fabricated and biased story under the caption “Bhutan Naresh Ke Purv OSD aur unki patni se dhokhadhadi” in its issue dated 30.12.2016. It is reported in the impugned news item that the former OSD of Bhutan Prince and his wife were cheated by the complainant and they have lodged complaint with the police. It is further reported in the impugned news item that after the intervention of the DCW, their FIR has been lodged by the police. It is also reported in the impugned news item that the complainant along with his three friends, among whom one was Sanjeev Kumar(Property Dealer), had demanded a sum of Rs. 3500/- for electricity bill which was actually of Rs. 1190/-. When the tenant questioned the complainant for excess amount, he got anger and pushed the wife of Shri Bhattacharya, the former OSD. Denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news item, the complainant stated that he is the owner of the flat and had rented the flat to Mr. Sanjoy Bhattacharya. He stated that he (Mr.Bhattacharya) filed a false complaint against him for misbehaving with his wife in connivance with the DCW. The complainant stated that neither the DCW nor the police verified or cross checked the authenticity of the complaint. According to the complainant, the news item was published just to malign his name in the society, family and friends. The complainant vide letter dated 31.1.2017 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned publication and requested him to publish corrigendum and apology, but received no response. He requested the Council to take action against the respondent. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor, Punjab Kesari, 22.02.2017. Written statement In response, the respondent ‘Punjab Kesari’ vide its written statement dated 1.4.2017 has submitted that the news item was published on the basis of an FIR filed by Mrs. Ananya Bhattacharya with Police Station, Dwarka, New Delhi on 27.12.2016. The respondent attached a copy of the FIR. The respondent has stated that if complainant has anything to say in this regard, he may meet them along with documentary evidence and would be happy to publish the version of the complainant. Counter comments The complainant vide counter comments dated 25.4.2017 submitted that the FIR against him is without any evidence and the story published is one sided totally partial and shielding a bad person. Mrs. Ananya Bhattacharya had lodged a false complaint with the DCW and under pressure from DCW, Police authority has lodged an FIR. He stated that he never involved Mrs. Bhattacharya in any issue/transactions. He further stated that he pays bill online, tenant transfers money to his account and their accounts were settled by 15th December, 2016. Hence, there is no motive for any fight or aggressiveness towards the tenant. He requested the Council to go through all the supporting documents, correspondence, evidence, proofs and HDFC Bank statement considering the gravity of material. Further Response from Complainant The complainant vide further comments dated 20.06.2017, while reiterating his request, has submitted that the respondent is to make amends by publishing his version with apology in prominent place and confirm the action taken in reply by registered post. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 20.06.2017 at New Delhi. The complainant, Shri Dalbir Singh Bisht appeared in person. Shri Ravinder Shanda, News Editor, Punjab Kesari and A.K Jain, Advocate, appeared for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and the Counsel for the respondent newspaper and has also perused the complaint, the written statement and all other connected papers. In the opinion of the Inquiry Committee, the impugned news item was published on the basis of an FIR lodged against the complainant the correctness or otherwise thereof is not for a newspaper or the council to adjudge. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the respondent newspaper has not breached any journalistic ethics while publishing the impugned news item. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint. Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dismiss the complaint. Press Council of India

Sl. No. 11 File No.14/360-362/16-17/PCI

Complainant Respondents The General Secretary, The Editors Trade Union Coordination Centre, 1. Aami Asomor Janagan, Central Committee, Guwahati, Lokhande Bhawan, F-52, 2. Amar Asom , Assam, 3. AgradootDainik, Assam.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 28.09.2016 has been filed by General Secretary, Trade Union Co-Ordination Centre, New Delhi against the editors t, there respondent newspapers viz: 1) Aami Asomor Janagan,2) Amar Asom and 3) Agradoot Dainik for publication of a story in their respective edition on 25.9.2016 quoting the statement of Mr.G.R.Shivshankar under the caption as mentioned below:-

Sl. Caption Newspaper No 1. New TUCC State Committee for Assam constituted (English Aami Asomor Translation) Janagan 2. Ratneshwar Gogoi being expelled as President of state TUCC Amar Asom, (English Translation) Assam 3. S.P Tiwari & Ratneshwar Gogoi expelled from Trade union Agradoot Dainik, coordination centre (English Translation) Assam

It is repeated in the impugned news items that Shri S.P. Tiwari, General Secretary of TUCC and Shri Ratneshwar Gogoi (President of TUCC) of Assam had been expelled from Trade Union Coordination Centre, a fraternal organization of All India Forward Block. It is also reported in Agradoot and Aami AssomerJanogon that they have not placed accounts of the TUCC before the Committee therefore this decision has been taken. It is also reported that the President of TUCC misused the funds and letter pad also by sending a complaint to the Police Commissioner of Guwahati, hence a new committee is elected. The complainant submitted that when the Assam State President Ratneshwar Gogoi came to know about the Press Conference of Mr. G.R. Shivshankar, reached there and protested during the press Conference and issued a clarification to press, but still the story got published in the three dailies on 25.09.2016. He has also submitted that after receiving the news clippings from Assam, he has issued a press release on 26.09.2016 along with his credentials and copy of the court order restraining Mr. Shivshankar to use the logo, emblem, letterhead and banner of TUCC, but the respondent did not take any cognizance of his press release and nor published any clarification. The complainant requested the Council to take action against the respondents.

Written Statement received from Aami Asomor Janagan

A Written Statement dated 12.06.2017 has been received from S.K Sinha, Editor, Aami Asomor Janagan, whereby, he has submitted that the news was published on the basis of a Press Meet organised by TUCC, Guwahati on 24 th September 2016. The news was based only on the brief described by the Secretary, TUCC Central Committee Shri G.R. Shivshankar and other office bearers. Aami Asomor Janagan did not report any additional facts in the news.

No Written Statement from Amar Asom and Agradoot Dainik A Show Cause Notices were issued to respondents, Amar Asom and AgradootDainik on 26.12.2016 but no response has been received.

Report of Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 19.06.2017 at New Delhi. No one has appeared for the complainant. Shri Durjay Kumar, Chief Manager (Marketing) appeared for the respondent paper, Aami Asom Asomor, Janagan.

Despite service of notice, the complainant has not chosen to appear. Respondent No.1, is represented by its correspondent, based at Delhi. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complainant, the reply filed by the “Aami Asomor Janagan” and other connected papers. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Inquiry Committee deems it expedient that newspaper, “Amar Asom” and “Agradoot Dainik” publish the clarification given by the complainant. The Inquiry Committee directs, for disposal of the complaint with the aforesaid directions.

Held

The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dispose of the complaint with direction to publish clarification.

Press Council of India

Sl. No. 12 F.NO. 14/380/16-17-PCI

Complainant Respondents Shri. G. Prasada Rao The Editor, GM- Corporate Communications Union Territory Independent, Air India LTD. 8-B, Behind Tej Press, GurudwaraRakabganj Road, Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 13.10.2016 has been filed by Shri. G Prasada Rao, GM- Corporate Communications, Air India LTD. New Delhi, against the Editor of Union Territory Independent, on English fortnightly for publication of allegedly defamatory content in the newspaper, Union Territory Independent against Air India. Details of the alleged impugned news items are given herein below,

S.No Issue Caption Brief . Dated 1. 01.10.2016 “Lohani ruins Air The impugned news item alleges India? that Mr. Ashwani Lohani, CMD, is under the sway of the Director (Personnel) Mr. Nikhil Kumar Jain, who is exploiting the weakness of Mr. Lohani to keep him under control, in order to fulfil his vested interests and favour the private players. The news item also stated that the accused have changed the no firm to hire pilots on contract basis only with first class GATE (Graduate Aptitude Engineering Test) results on the recommendation of Mr. Nikhil Kumar Jain to favour his trusted people. 2. April 16-30, Reward for This article claims that the Air India 2016 corruption! is ruined by the former civil aviation minister when he decided to merge the Indian Airlines with Air India and from that time the bad days of Air India has started. Though present CMD of Air India claimed to revive the condition of Air India, but senior officials of Air India, who after retirement, hold senior positions in the same organisation, are putting hurdles in his initiatives. Competent officers are not given chance to work and hence corruption is ruining Air India. 3. Apri l 1-15, Multi -Crore Pilot The article states that “Air India is 2016. Recruitment. being ruined by the corrupt officers and politicians. It went into huge losses when Praful alias Bidi Patel was Union Civil Aviation Minsiter. He decided to merge Indian Airlines with Air India and it became a cause that made national carrier a loss making company. To serve his vested interests Mr Praful Patel allowed private players to fly on profitable routes”.

The complainant alleges that the said newspaper has been time and again carrying spurious stories related to Air India without any foundation factual reality, cogent proof or confirmation of the same from authorized spokespersons of Air India. The complainant further alleges that the articles are being published by the said newspaper without adhering to any journalistic ethics with the sole purpose to harm the reputation of Air India and its employees in crude and vulgar manner. The Complainant further submits that several legal notices were sent to the respondent newspaper, warning them against publishing malicious content against Air India without any regard for factual accuracy. The first legal notice was sent on 25.04.2016, followed by a reminder dated 20.06.2016 and another Notice was sent on 6.10.2016 with reference to another alleged impugned news item accusing the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of Air India of ruining the airline. However, despite repeated warnings, the respondent newspaper did not publish any clarification nor has apologised for the wrongdoing. The complainant alleges that the series of capricious, fabricated and humiliating reports are being published unabatedly which reflects the deliberate malafide intent of the newspaper to bring disrepute, disrespect and mass ignominy to Air India. In light of the above grievance the complainant has requested the Council to take appropriate action against the respondent newspaper to curb its unethical, immoral and unprofessional conduct in constantly attempting to tarnish the image of the national carrier. Reply Filed by the Respondent A Show-Cause notice dated 21.12.2016 was issued to the Editor of the respondent newspaper to which the editor vide letter dated 16.01.2017 has submitted its reply which states that the Newspaper is a leading fortnightly known for its high stand against corruption and nepotism in Government and public offices and claims that its editorials always stand with the people and stand against the people who want to silence the fight against corruption. The matters reported are true to their knowledge and hence the claim of Air India that the newspaper is publishing defamatory articles against Air India is untrue and the complaint should be dismissed.

Report of the Inquiry Committee Following an adjournment dated 11.04.2017, the matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 20.06.2017 at New Delhi. Nobody appears on behalf of the complainant. Earlier also they had not chosen to appear. The respondent is represented by his Counsel, Shri Thomas Joseph Advocate. The Inquiry Committee recommends for dismissal of the complaint for want of persuance.

Item No. 13 F.No.14/491/16-17-PCI

Shri Arvind Rajvedi, The Editor, Director (Administration) Vishwa Parikrama Times, Western Electricity Distribution Nigam Ltd., Meerut, U.P. Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 18.1.2017 has been filed by Shri Arvind Rajvedi, Director (Administration) Western Electricity Distribution Nigam Ltd., Meerut, Uttar Pradesh against Editor, Vishwa Parikrama Times, Meerut, U.P. alleging publication a series of misleading, false and baseless news items which are given below: S. No. Caption Dated

1 “Bijli chori rokne wale daal rahe hai dacoity” 21.12.2 016

2 “Pashi manchal Vidhyu t Comp any mei n Su preme Cour t ke 14.12.2 01 6 aadeshon par hathoda, sura aur sundry ke shaukeen MD ne kholi sthantaran ki dukan, mukhyamantri ke naam par ek varsh me 12 crore ki awaidh vasooli”

3 “Free ki chai va hisse ke lalach me muqadma harne walon 7. 12.2 01 6 par rangeen mijaj PVVNL MD meharbaan”

4 “Kabja karwane walon par rangeen mijaj MD meharbaan” 28.9.201 6 “commission khor engineer G.K. Gupta par prabandh nideshak meharbaan”

5 “PVVNL ke mukhya abhiyanta par arbon ka commission 28.8.201 6 lene ka aarop”

6 “Paisa public ka, prachar SPA ka, commission PVVNL Ka” 14.6.2016

7 “Vidhyut vibhag ke engineer par raj bhwan bhi meharbaan” Marc h 201 5

8 “Pant ki aankhon ke tare brasht engineer” Febr uar y 2015

The series of impugned news items depicts the MD as well as Officers of Pashimanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam in bad light. They have been shown to be corrupt, misappropriating funds and indulged in electricity theft. It is further reported that Western Electricity Distribution Nigam Ltd., disobeying the orders of Supreme Court. They are earning illegal money of Rs.12 crores using the name of Chief Minister. The complainant submitted that the respondent is continuously publishing the false news and defaming the officers of electricity department. The complainant vide letters dated 24.10.2016 and 18.11.2016 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news item but received no response. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor, Vishwa Parkrama Times, Meerut on 23.3.2017.

Written Statement The respondent in his written statement dated 6.4.2017 has denied the allegations of the complainant and submitted that annexure which has been enclosed by the complainant in support of his objections are baseless and false. In the Written Statement, the editor elaborates various incidents relating to corrupt activities prevailing in the Pashimanchal Vidhyut Vitran Nigam and the series of impugned news items are factual.

Counter Comments The Director (Administration) Western Electricity Distribution Nigam Ltd., Meerut, Uttar Pradesh in his counter comments dated 19.6.2017 while reiterating that the respondent has published a series of misleading, false, defamatory and baseless news items from time to time alleged that the respondent has not produced any evidence in support of his story but used unparliamentry language in his reply. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 20.6.2017 at New Delhi. Smt. Suman Lata, Dy. Law Officer along with Shri Pradeep Kumar, Dy. General Manager appeared for the complainant. Shri Vinod Malik, Editor appeared for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant as also the respondent and also perused the complaint, the written statement and other connected papers. Ongoing through the contents of the impugned news item, the Inquiry Committee satisfied that the language used and the manner of presentation of series of news items are absolutely unethical. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for censure of the newspaper.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Censure the respondent newspaper, Vishwa Parikrama Times, Meerut, U.P. A copy of this order be forwarded to the Director, Information & Public Relations Department of Government of U.P., the Director General, DAVP, the District Magistrate, Meerut, U.P. and RNI for appropriate action. Press Council of India

Sl. No. 14 F. No. 14/899/14-15-PCI

Suo-motu action on reference received from the Election Commission of India, New Delhi against the editor, Bijnor Times, Bijnor, U.P. for publication of paid news.

Revised Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

A review application dated 3.11.2016 was received from the respondent editor, Dainik Chingari against the adjudication dated 9.9.2016 whereby the paper had been Censured for publishing paid news, on the ground that another newspaper viz. Bijnor Times from Bijnor had also published the same news item under the same caption “िम म◌ौ ल◌ा ना तम◌ौ ककी र रज◌ा नन बसप◌ा कक सिम रथन दिदय ◌ा ”as published in Dainik Chingari which was dismissed by the Council. The Council considered the review application in its meeting held on 3.3.2017 at New Delhi and noted the similarity of impugned publication with adjudication in case against Bijnor Times. It prima-facie found that an inadvertent error had occurred in the adjudication dated 9.9.2016 in the related case of Bijnor Times. Accordingly, the Inquiry Committee directed the Secretariat to issue Notice to the Bijnor Times as to why the said Order dated 9.9.2016 in File No. 14/899/14-15-PCI be not reviewed. Both the cases be clubbed and listed together. Accordingly, a letter dated 17.4.2017 was issued to the editor, Bijnor Times but received no response. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter again came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 19.6.2017 at New Delhi. Shri Ichardramani Raghuvanshi, editor, appeared for the respondent, Bijnor Times. The Inquiry Committee notes that this proceeding was initiated on the basis of communication dated 20.1.2015 received from Shri S.K. Das, Under Secretary, Election Commission of India, New Delhi forwarded the report of confirmed case of paid news against the newspaper ‘Bijnor Times’ in its issues dated 28.3.2014 and 2.4.2014. The Council has laid down principles for adjudication of paid news which is as follows: “Paid news would mean any words appearing in media, or omitted from media in lieu of a consideration given either earlier, at the time or after publication in any form. It is a clandestine financial transaction conceived in fraud and delivered in deceit, and hence it is difficult to get direct evidence to establish it. But while direct evidence may not be available it is possible to infer the incidence of paid news from strong circumstantial evidence. At the same time, an onerous responsibility on election authorities is to ensure that the process of identifying paid news is exhaustive and credible because the reputation of publications and journalists is at stake. No hard and fast rule or straight jacket formula is possible to be laid down to determine the issue of paid news and it will depend upon the facts and circumstances of each. Merely, because a particular news item appears to serve the cause of a particular candidate, it cannot be concluded that it was paid news. Further, publication of interview of a candidate or political coverage in the newspaper cannot itself be the reason to term the same to be paid news. Bad journalism may raise doubt about the credibility of news but from that to jump to the conclusion that those are paid news would be irrational. During the course of election, subject to the conditions laid down by the Election Commission of India, newspapers are free to make an honest assessment of prospects of candidates or the parties and its publication would not be paid news so long it is not established that consideration passed on for such publication. One has to bear in mind that many newspapers have editorial policy to support the candidate of particular thought or region and in such cases writing in favour of such candidates would not amount to paid news. Mere publication of an advertisement by the candidate on the date when the news item pertaining to this nature has been published, itself may not be conclusive to establish the impugned publication as a paid news. State election authorities have little appreciation of the nuances of journalism and therefore fell into grave error while making comment on what is news and what may be paid news. The state electoral authorities before making public their findings of paid news ought to have applied themselves judiciously to the issue at hand especially because adverse findings would injure the reputations of newspapers/periodicals .” The Inquiry Committee has perused the impugned news item in the light of the aforesaid principles. It also heard the complainant. The only ground urged on behalf of Dainik Chingari is that ‘Bijnor Times’ had also published the same news but complaint against it has been dismissed but the respondent has been Censured. The Inquiry Committee examined the facts of the case in the light of the submissions made and finds that inadvertently the complaint against Bijnor Times was dismissed earlier. The Inquiry Committee has recommended for rescinding the said order. Thus, the very substratum seeking review of the order has perished. Accordingly, the Inquiry Committee does not find any merit in the review petition and recommends for its dismissal. The Inquiry Committee has perused the impugned news item published in ‘Bijnor Times’. The tenor and the manner of presentation of the news item clearly show that it is paid news. Accordingly, the Inquiry Committee upholds the allegation and rescind its earlier order dated 9.9.2016. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends that the newspaper ‘Bijnor Times’ be Censured.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decide to Censure the respondent newspaper, Bijnor Times, Bijnor U.P. A copy of this order be forwarded to the District Magistrate, Bijnor, the Director, Information & Public Relation Department, Govt. of U.P., the Director General, DAVP, RNI and the Election Commission of India for necessary action at their end. Press Council of India

Sl. No. 15 F. No. 14/363/16-17-PCI

Shri Pramod Kumar Singh Chauhan, The Editor, C/o Shri Mohd. Khalid, Advocate, Dainik Jagran, The Company Law Chamber, Meerut, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This undated complaint has been filed by Shri Pramod Kumar Singh Chauhan and other official staff, Office of the Superintendent of Police Gramin, Meerut, U.P. through Mohd. Khalid, Advocate against the editor, ‘Dainik Jagran’, for allegedly publishing false, baseless, misleading news item along with photo under the caption “SP dehat ke karayalya mein hua samjhauta” in its issue dated 29.9.2016 to defame him in the society and by maligning his service record in the department.

It is reported in the impugned news item that a lot of haggling took place in the name of compromise arrived at a confidential room of SP Dehat. It is further reported that Shri Shahzad and Shri Bilal of Dhauladi, after purchasing mangoes orchids, sold the mangoes at Mandi in Delhi. They both have sold mangoes to Shri Hazi Kaloo of Aazadpur Mandi. Shri Hazi Kaloo alleged that they have taken ten lakh in advance from him. However, Sh. Shahzad and Sh. Bilal alleged that even after receiving consignment of mangoes, Shri Kaloo has not given payment of Rs. ten lakh to them. In this regard, both the parties filed complaints to the SP Dehat. Both the parties were made to settle the matter in confidential room of SP Dehat at 5:00 p.m. When the photo of the aforesaid incident was being taken, the staff swiftly ran away leaving both the parties. After sometime, the staff returned to the spot and Shri J. Ravinder Gaur, SSP showed his ignorance on the incident. He informed that the matter will be investigated. The complainant submitted that while investigating the matter in question at the work place, the SP was engaged with the parties. In the meantime, a photographer with his colleague started to click photos. While they were asked to leave the restricted area, a secret room and in all the chaos, the papers kept on the table relating to the parties hot scattered and in this way obstructed the official work. The complainant further submitted that it is prohibited for any person to enter at the secret official place without permission. When they were asked to leave that room, the photographer misbehaved stating that they can access any area and even your captain can’t stop us. The complainant drew the attention of the respondent through the letter on 7.10.2016 for reply and followed by reminder to publish corrigendum for the same but no response was received. The complainant alleged that the impugned report has badly affected him and defamed him in society/department and maligned his service record. No Written Statement

A Show Cause Notice issued to the respondent editor, ‘Dainik Jagran’, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh on 20.1.2017 but no written statement has been filed.

Complainant’s Further Letter

The complainant vide another letter dated 30.1.2017 informed that the correspondent of the respondent newspaper was exerting pressure upon him to settle a case. When the complainant did not bother, the correspondent/photographer planted the episode reported in the impugned news item and published the impugned news item.

Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 19.6.2017 at New Delhi. Despite service of notice, there is no appearance on behalf of either side.

The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and the connected papers and is of the opinion that no case for interference of the Council is made out. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint.

SI. NO. 16 F.NO. 14/422/16-17-PCI

Complainant Respondent Priyadarshini Yadav, The Editor NavManav Vikas Kalyan Samiti, Awaz Newspaper, Hirapur, Luby Circular Road, Dhanbad, Jharkhand. Dhanbad, Jharkhand. Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 25.11.2016 has been filed by Priyadarshini Yadav, Secretary, Nav Manav Vikash Kalyan Samiti, Dhanbad, Jharkhand against Awaz newspaper alleging the publication of defamatory/derogatory news item by it. The complainant has stated that she has been running a registered NGO namely,Nav Manav Vikas Kalyan Samiti, Dhanbad, for last ten years and has been working in the social welfare field for long. She has alleged that one person named Mr. GP Baliya in connivance of the editor/publisher of Awaz Newspaper has got the alleged defamatory and derogatory news items published wherein it was reported that the complainant and her Sister Smt. Pragyapriya are involved in flesh trade business and running sex racket in the name of an NGO. The defamatory news items published in the respondent newspapers issue dated 12.09.2016 may captioned “NGO ki Khilaf Karwahi karne ki mang ”, in which it has been stated that Mr. G.P. Baliya has informed the authorities against the alleged involvement of Smt. Priyadarshini Yadav in a flesh trade in the grap of running an NGO where the female school students are victimised and are pushed into flesh trade. Mr. G.P. Baliya, has therefore asked the authorities to take action against these two sisters.

Two legal notices seeking for publication of clarification was forwarded to the respondent newspaper and the clarification was published by the respondent newspaper in its issue dated 19.11.2016 captioned “Spastikaran” which says that “Smt. Priyadarshini Yadav has written to the newspaper with regard to the news published by the Newspaper on 12.09.2016 alleging that Ms. Yadav and her sister are running sex trade business in the name of NGO and has stated that all the allegations are false and baseless”. The complainant was not satisfied with the clarification published by the respondent newspaper and requested the Council to take necessary action against the respondent newspaper for publication of defamatory and derogatory news against the complainant and her family member. Reply Filed by the Respondent

In the Written Statement filed on 16.01.2017 in response to the Show Cause notice dated 5.1.2017, the respondent noticed that a clarification has already been published against the alleged impugned news item on 19.11.2016 and another clarification captioned “Bhul Sudhar” published in its issue dated 16.01.2017 giving a clarification against the publication dated 12.09.2016.

Counter Statement of the Complainant

The complainant captioned on 4.2.2017 that the clarification published by the respondent newspaper is not satisfactory and does not help in erasing the allegations made against the complainant and her family member whose social image has got badly affected after the publication because of the alleged impugned news item.

Report of Inquiry Committee

The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 19.06.2017 at New Delhi. While no one appeared on behalf of the complainant. Shri R.N. Tiwari, representative, appeared for the respondent newspaper.

The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, the reply and all the connected papers. In view of the clarification and apology published by the respondent newspaper, the Inquiry Committee is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee however, observes that the respondent has averted today that the impugned publication was based on a person press note received by it. While the complainant contains that the concerned person Shri G.P Bhatia holds a personal grudge and was therefore spreading such lies. In view of, the Committee advices that in a matter as directly affected the personal reputation. The complainant ought to have been more careful involved of just publishing the press note.

The Inquiry Committee recommends for disposal of the complaint with these observations.

Complainant Respondent Ms. X, The Editor, (Name withheld to protect identity), Dainik Bhaskar, Chandigarh. Chandigarh.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 31.10.2014 was filed by Ms. X, (Name withheld to protect identity) against the Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Chandigarh for allegedly publishing a series of news items in its issues dated 14.9.2014, 19.9.2014 and 31.10.2014 wherein her name as a rape victim in a rape case was disclosed. The complainant further alleged that the respondent by revealing her identity as rape victim defamed her, which is a cognizable offence under Section 228A of IPC. She has requested the Council to take necessary action against the respondent.

No Written Statement Show-cause Notice was issued to the respondent-Editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Chandigarh on 19.7.2016 but no reply was filed by the paper. Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following two adjournments dated 4.10.2016 and 9.1.2017, the matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 12.7.2017 at New Delhi. There was no appearance from either side, despite service of notice. The respondent has also not chosen to file its show cause. It is the allegation of the complainant that her name has been disclosed in the impugned news item of being a victim of rape, which is prohibited under Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The norms enunciated by the Council also provides that name of the victim of rape is not disclosed. The respondent has not come out with any explanation for violation of legal as also ethical requirement. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Inquiry Committee has no option but to Censure the newspaper for violating the law as also the code of conduct. The Inquiry Committee upholds the complaint in the aforesaid manner and recommends to the Council to Censure the respondent editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Chandigarh.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Censure the respondent editor. Dainik Bhaskar, Chandigarh. A copy of the adjudication be forwarded to the Director General, DAVP, the Director, Inforamtion & Public Relations Department, Govt. of Punjab, the District Magistrate, Chandigarh and the Registrar for Newspaper of India for appropriate action at their end. PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

SI. NO. 18 F.No.14/556/15-16-PCI

Complaint of Smt. Seema Chouhan, President, Matra Shakti Sangathan, Siwani against the editor, Hind Gazette, Siwani DEFERRED PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

Sl. No. 19 F.No.14/338/16-17-PCI

Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, The Editor, Circle Officer, Etmadur, The Times of india, Agra Edition, Agra, Uttar Pradesh. Distt. Agra.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 2.10.2016 has been filed by Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, Circle Officer, Etmadpur, Agra, Uttar Pradesh against the editor, The Times of India, Agra edition for alleging publication of false and untrue news item in its issue dated 23.9.2016 captioned “Dalit teen beaten over suspicion of buffalo theft” and “upper caste men whip Dalit teen for stealing buffalo.” The news item reported that the identified accused have been booked under Section 352 of the IPC and provisions of the SC/ST Act The complainant alleged that the news item is misleading and untrue as the victim’s father, Virendra Singh Baghel of Nagla Swarup belongs to ‘gadariya’ caste (a shepherd caste found in North India) which falls under the Other Backward Classes(OBC) category but not a Dalit. The complainant issued a Notice dated 28.9.2016 to the respondent newspaper seeking clarification within a week for publishing such sensitive news. The complainant submits that the contents of the aforesaid news item are incorrect, misleading and affected the peace and harmony of the region, which the police, after a long struggle, had brought under control. The complainant added that the newspaper should have published such sensitive news after due inquiry and verification of facts. The complainant prayed before the Council to take stringent action against the respondent newspaper for publishing misleading and provocative news item that had adversely affected the peace and public harmony in the region.

Written Statement A Show-Cause Notice dated 15.12.2016 was issued to the Editor, Times of India, Agra edition. Vide written statement dated 21.1.2016, the respondent newspaper has informed that it had printed a corrigendum to the report ‘upper caste men whip Dalit teen for stealing buffalo’(published on 23.9.2016) in the edition dated 28.9.2016, where the newspaper had regretted the error and made necessary amendments in the subsequent reports on the issue. The respondent editor has further informed the Council that a copies of the corrigendum were also forwarded to the complainant, Abhishik Kumar Singh and his senior the District Police Chief, Preetinder Singh and both of them have expressed their satisfaction over the matter, bringing the dispute to a closure.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following an adjournment dated 15.5.2017, the matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 12.7.2017 at New Delhi. There was no appearance from either side. This complaint has been filed by the Circle Officer, Etmadpur, Agra, U.P. against the respondent newspaper for publishing an incorrect news. According to the complainant, the respondent newspaper published the news item with the heading “Dalit teen beaten over suspicion of buffalo theft” and in continuation another story with the headline “Upper caste men whip dalit teen for stealing buffalo”. The newspaper went to the extent of saying that a case under the provisions of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was also registered. It is the assertion of the complainant that the entire news item is false. No dalit was assaulted and further no case under the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was registered. The respondent in his written statement has stated that after it has come to its notice, the newspaper regretted the error and made necessary amendments in the reports in the subsequence issue. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that admission of an error and publishing a corrigendum itself is not sufficient to absolve the newspaper for its action of printing an incorrect news item in a matter that could adversely impact caste relation and harmony. The newspaper is required to explain the circumstances under which the error had happened and establish that it was bona fide and unintentional. The respondent has not come out with any such explanation. In the facts and circumstance of the case, the Inquiry Committee recommends to the respondent newspaper to be careful in future as such false news item has the potency to disturb the peace and tranquillity in the Country. The Inquiry Committee recommends to the Council to dispose of the complaint with the aforesaid observations. The newspaper is directed to publish the order of the Council immediately.

SI.No. 20 F. No. 14/596/15-16-PCI

Complainant Respondent Human Rights Protection Forum, The Editor, R.K. Samyal, Satpal Choudhry, Advocates, Dainik Savera Times, Vice Chairman, President Chandigarh, Punjab Chandigarh

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 26.2.2016 has been filed by Human Rights Protection Forum, Chandigarh against the Editor, Dainik Savera Times, Jalandhar alleging publication of false, obnoxious and misleading advertisement under Drug and Magical Remedies (objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 as the advertisements not only opposed to public policy/interest but also against the journalistic ethics.

The complainant has expressed concern over various types of classified advertisements published in Dainik Savera Times such as advertisements of (i) Tantriks, Babas, Pandits who claim to heal or cure people with an aid of black magic or such powers,(ii) advertisement regarding maintenance and improvement of sexual organs of human being for sexual pleasure, (iii) Tele-friendship advertisements inviting general public to dial the given number for ‘entertaining’ talk and offering suggestive tele-talk tend to pollute adolescent minds and promote immoral cultural ethos. According to the complainant classified advertisements of health and physical fitness services using undignified languages, indicative of covert soliciting, are violative of law as well as ethics. The routine publication of these prohibited advertisements and regular feature of classified pages emerged to be a lucrative business for the respondent paper. The complainant issued a notice dated 18.02.2016 to the respondent drawing his attention towards the impugned advertisements which are even being displayed on web site of the respondent publication and requested him to restrain from publishing the prohibited advertisement in his newspaper. The complainant prayed to the Council to take action against the respondent as instead of curbing the menace of superstitions which are widely prevailing in our society, it is encouraging the crook and unscrupulous persons to victimize the poor and innocent people.

No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice issued to the respondent Editor, Dainik Savera Times on 31.3.2016 , elicited no reply in defence Report of the Inquiry Committee Following an adjournment dated 5.10.2016 the matter came up for hearing on 12.7.2017/13.07.2017. No one has appeared for the complainant. Shri Shahzad Akhtar, Correspondent, appeared for the respondent paper

The Editor-in-Chief of the Dainik Savera Times has sent a letter dated 13.7.2017, inter alia, stating that when it came to its notice that objectionable advertisements being published in the newspaper are objectionable, it has been decided that no such advertisement shall be published in future. The Inquiry Committee takes note of the assurance given by the Editor-in-Chief of the Dainik Savera Times and accordingly disposes of the complaint.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dispose of the complaint in wake of assurance given by the respondent newspaper. Press Council of India Sl. No. 21 F.No.14/303/16-17-PCI. Complainant Respondents Shri Satya Narayan Prasad, The Editor, Amarpuri Navi Karim, Rashtriya Sahara, New Delhi New Delhi

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 14.9.2016 has been filed by Shri Satya Narayan Prasad against the editor, Rashtriya Sahara, New Delhi for allegedly publishing false and baseless news item in its issue dared 12.12.2015 under the caption “Bhajpa ke chunav chinh par rok lagane ki maang”. The news item in question talks about a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) filed in Delhi High Court by a voluntary organisation for banning the use of a symbol by a particular party which was heard by the Hon’ble Court on 11.12.2015. According to the complainant, the impugned news item is false and incorrect. The complainant submitted that on 21.12.2015, he presented a PIL against the use of the Lotus flower as a logo/symbol by a political party in the Hon’ble Court but the opposition lawyer showing a news item of Rashtriya Sahara stating that such a matter is already listed in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi for hearing on 5.1.2016 so the Hon’ble High Court dismissed the PIL on the ground that the similar matter is already listed in the Court. The complainant further submitted that in order to enquire that actually such matter is listed for hearing on 5.12.2016, he tried to listen to the hearing and even filed RTI but all his attempt went in vain. In fact, he doubts that the opposition lawyer in connivance with the editor of Rashtriya Sahara has intentionally published such misleading and false news so that his PIL gets rejected by the Court. The complainant vide letter dated 28.3.2016 had asked the editor of the respondent newspaper to share the source of information from which the newspaper had published the misleading news but no response was received. The complainant has requested the Council to take appropriate action against the newspaper.

Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor on 7.11.2016 The respondent in his written statement dated 2.2.2017 has submitted that the complaint deserves to be dismissed on the ground that the complainant is a frivolous litigator. He alleged that the complainant concealed the fact from this Hon’ble Council that a Writ Petition (C) No. 11458 of 2015 was filed and listed before the Hon’ble High Court on 11.12.2015. He further alleged that the instant complaint is completely misconceived and filed with a view to mislead the Press Council of India by suppressing material facts. The complainant chose not to annex the copy of order dated 21.12.2015 which was passed in the Writ Petition No. 11920 of 2015 filed by hims. He has stated that there is no legal obligation of the respondent to answer each and every communication sent by the complainant which is frivolous and have no statutory basis whatsoever. He has further stated the news article with regard to the subject proceeding before the Hon’ble High Court on 11.12.2015 in W.P. (C) bearing No. 11920/2015 titled as Parivar Niyantran Samiti (Regd.) was published by several news agencies by referring to that the said petition was filed with a view to seek cancellation of the “lotus” as a symbol for Bhartiya Janata Party. He has requested the Council to dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost and to pass appropriate orders after considering all the materials before this Hon’ble Committee. Counter Comments The complainant in his undated counter comments received on 28.3.2017 has stated that if the respondent proves that the petition dated 11.12.2015 has the same subject matter as in the present complaint, then he will withdraw his complaint and the Council can give him the highest penalty for filing a false complaint before it. He denied the allegations made in the written statement and stated that the reply of the respondent is based on the false fact. Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following an adjournment dated 10.1.2017, the matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 12.7.2017 at New Delhi. Shri Satyanarayan Prasad, the complainant appeared in person. Shri Gautam Talukdar, Advocate appeared for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and the Counsel for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has also perused the complaint, the written statement and other connected papers. The respondent has also filed cutting of reports similar to the impugned news item published in various other newspapers.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Inquiry Committee is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends to the Council to dismiss the complaint.

Held

The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dismiss the complaint. Press Council of India Sl. No.22 F.NO. 14/137/16-17-PCI Shri Loknath Behera, IPS The Editor, DGP & State Police Chief Mangalam, Police Head Quarters, Kerala Kottayam, Kerala Thiruvananthapuram

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated June 24, 2016 has been filed by Shri Loknath Behera IPS, DGP & State Police Chief, Thiruvananthapuram, against the editor of Mangalam, a Malayalam newspaper for publishing offensive and misleading news item with photograph of the person allegedly the accused, in its issue dated 24.06.2016 thereby hampering police investigation in the case of murder of a dalit law student, Jisha. The complainant stated that this case is very sensitive and the accused is a native of Assam who is in police custody and being interrogated by the police. He alleged that both the print and the electronic media with an intention to sensationalise the issue are misinforming the public meeting adversely affecting the investigation process. The complainant had further submitted that they have already requested the media to not to cover the matter at this stage when police investigation is on, but, that did not help. The complainant, therefore, requested the Press Council of India to take action as deem fit so that the investigation does not suffer or get affected by the conduct or coverage by media persons in Kerala. No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice dated 8.08.2016 followed by Time Bound Reminder dated 26.10.2016 was issued to the respondent newspaper for Written Statement in the matter but the respondent newspaper did not file any written statement. Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following an adjournment dated 15.3.2017, the matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 12.7.2017 at New Delhi. Dr. N.C. Asthana, IPS, DGP(Modernization), Kerala Police appeared on behalf of the complainant. There was no appearance on behalf of the respondent.

The Inquiry Committee has heard the representative of the complainant. It has also perused the complaint and other connected papers. Mr. Asthana points out that immediately after the impugned report was published, the competent authority from the Office of the DGP gave its version but the same has not been published by the newspaper. There is no such assertion either in the complaint, nor he has produced the version given to the newspaper for publication. In case, the complainant or the competent authority had given their version to the respondent newspaper soon after publication of impugned news, they shall produce the same before editor of the newspaper. In case, the complainant satisfies the respondent newspaper that such version was given immediately after publication of the impugned news item, the respondent will publish the same with the same prominence, after necessary editing. The Inquiry Committee recommends to the Council to dispose of the complaint with the aforesaid directions.

Ms. Vandana Nigam 1. The Editor E mail [email protected] Vs. Aryavarth Express, 97,3 rd Cross,S-1, Maloo Plaltinum 3rd stage B.C.C. Layout, Chandra Layout, Vijayanagara Bangalore.

2. The Editor, Parivartan Prabha 97,3 rd Cross,S-1, Maloo Plaltinum 3rd stage B.C.C. Layout, Chandra Layout, Vijayanagara Bangalore.

3. The Editor, Sajag Samachar Parivertan Ka F-204, T-1, AdarshPaim Retreat Deverabisanahalli, Outer Ring Road, Bangalore-560103 Karnataka

ADJUDICATION Dated: 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 02.05.2016 has been filed by Ms. Vandana Nigam against the editors, (i) The Aryavarth Express, (ii) Parivartan Prabha and (iii) Sajag Samachar Parivartan Ka for publishing a news item under the caption “the adarsh palm retreat residents left in lurch; president plays foul game with Khata Money” in their respective issue dated 27 January to 02 February, 2016. The complainant alleges that the articles are completely false and have been published with no research and investigation whatsoever. The aforesaid papers again published certain articles in various issues under the heading “Adarsh Palm Retreat residents left in the lurch”, “President plays foul game with khata money”, “Adarsh Palm Retreat residents ask Vandana”, “Adarsh RWA row lingers on”, “After FIR, RWA President ask Vandana”, Adarsh RWA row lingers on”, “After FIR, RWA President refuses sending email”, “Adarsh RWA row matter may reach Lokayuktha” etc. The gist of the contests of the articles was that Adarsh Developers had requested the Managing Committee to communicate with the residents for making payment towards the khata processing and Vandana Nigam had communicated to those residents concerned to make good payment of Rs. 10,000/- towards the acceptance for the transfer of khatas which have not been transferred to the name of the respective residents and further that Vandana Nigam has shown apathy by replying that she was not responsible and was not present when the money for khata was being paid. In another article, it is reported that “the President of APRWA seems to only nurture her dubious stances regarding the khata allotment to the residents and now the complaint is so obvious and it is only a matter of show-casing details to the Lokayuktha”. The complainant requested the Council to take appropriate action and stop the paper from abusing the rights and privileges of being a member of the Forth Estate and withdraw the false articles which respondent has published about complainant and the management committee. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editors, “The Aryavarth Express”, “Parivartan Prabha” and “Sajag Samachar Parivartan Ka” on 1.8.2016.

Written Statement

The respondents filed their respective written statements on 19.07.2016. The respondents submitted that all the allegations made by Mrs. Vandana Nigam are false and frivolous. There has been no unethical reporting of news in Aryavarth Express, Sajag Samachar Parivartan Ka and Parivartan Prabha newspapers published by Prashant Goenka Group, Bangalore. Mrs. Vandana Nigam shifted from USA to India, Adarsh Palm Retreat, at Bangalore in month of July 2012. Further it is stated that Mrs. Vandana Nigam was elected as the Secretary of the Adarsh Palm Retreat T1 Managing Committee in the year 2014 and subsequently as the President in the year 2015. Further, Mr. Prashant Goenka shifted to the said residential complex in December, 2012. There was no personal dispute or grievance between Mr. Prashant Goenka and Mrs. Vandana Nigam as stated in the complaint. The respondent also stated that there was no harassment done in the personal capacity to Mrs. Vandana Nigam. The Prashant Goenka Group believed in equality of men and women in society and has always encouraged women at the work front.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 12.7.2017 at New Delhi followed by adjournment dated 14.3.2017. There was no appearance on behalf of the complainant and respondent side. Despite service of notice nobody appears on behalf of the complainant. On an earlier occasion also she had not appeared. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, all other connected papers and is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further.

The Inquiry Committee recommends for disposal of the complaint.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and Report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons, findings and adopts the Report of the Committee and decides to dispose of the complaint. PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

Sl.No. 24 F.No. 14/298/16-17-PCI

The Director, The Editor, Chetna School of Nursing, Dainik Jagran, Shaheed Sauragh Garg Road, Vs. Panipat, Haryana Pillu Khera, District-Jind, Haryana ADJUDICATION Dated: 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 6.9.2016 has been filed by the Director, Chetna School of Nursing, Jind, Haryana against the editor, Dainik Jagran, Panipat, Haryana allegedly for publishing false and misleading news item under the caption “bina NOC ke chal raha tha nursing college” in its issue dated 14.7.2016.

The impugned news reports that matter related to existence of fake educational institutes are often highlighted in the State. A matter has come to the light where a nursing college is running at Pillu Kheda, Jind, without having NOC and trained teachers. Upon investigation of the matter on the direction of the D.C., many discrepancies have been noticed in the Nursing School. The paper had printed simultaneously (in box) in the same news item, a statement purported to have been issued by the SDM, Safeedo mentioning that the inspection has been conducted for two days by joint team of different departments on the direction of the D.C. after receiving application for recognition of a nursing college. There are some discrepancies noticed but nothing can be said without the Report.

The complainant alleged that the news was published with specific aim to defame his institute. Although name of the institute was not published but it clearly indicates that news was related to their institute as there is no other nursing or college in this region. The complainant submitted that his institute is running in accordance with the rules and guidelines of the concerned departments and competent authorities. In this regard, the institute had received NOC from the concerned department in 2012. The complainant submitted that his institute is the only recognized nursing institute in Pillu Kheda block. A routine investigation was conducted under the chairmanship of SDM on 12.7.2016. The complainant submitted that the Haryana Govt. had issued NOC to the institute on 11.4.2012 followed by recognition by Haryana Nursing Council, Chandigarh and INC, New Delhi as well. The routine inspection is only meant for the institute having NOC. The SDM mentioned some shortcomings loopholes but the paper interpreted it as major lapses. The complainant drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news item but no response was received by them. The complainant requested to take strict action against the respondent newspaper.

A Show Cause Notice issued to the respondent editor, Dainik Jagran, Panipat, Haryana on 2.12.2016.

Written statement

The respondent vide undated letter received in the Sectt. On 28.2.2017 submitted that the complaint filed is baseless and false. The DC had organized inquiry team of various departments for investigating the nursing college of Pillu Kheda in July, 2016 under supervision of the present SDM of Safido, Shri Balram Jakhar. The said news report was published after receiving confirmed report from the SDM over phone without naming the institute, which is absolutely true. college in question was also investigated in July and shortcomings in functioning of the institutes during the inquiry were also confirmed from the sources engaged in the investigation. It has also come to the light that the Directors of the institute have got it recognized through their political links by hiding the shortcomings.The respondent submitted that the intention of the complainant behind the complaint is to defame the reputed newspaper. The impugned news is completely true and published adhering to the norms of journalism in public interest without naming or defaming any person or institute.

A copy of the written statement was forwarded to the complainant on 13.4.2017.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 12.7.2017 at New Delhi. The complainant was present in person whereas Shri R.K.Dubey, Manager-Legal appeared for the respondent paper.

The parties have been heard. The complainant as also the respondent have thereafter produced before the Inquiry Committee a draft of the clarification the respondent newspaper has undertaken to publish. This satisfies both the parties. This be kept on record.

The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee recommends, for disposal of the complaint as settled.

PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA SI.No. 25 F.No. 14/427/ 16 -17/PCI Complainant Respondent Shri Dinesh Chander, The Editor, New Delhi. Hindustan , New Delhi.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 27.11.2016 has been filed by Shri Dinesh Chander, New Delhi, against the Editor, Hindustan, New Delhi, alleging publication of a false, derogatory and highly objectionable news item in respect of his deceased wife, Smt. Renu, in its publication dated 22.11.2016 under the caption” Premika ko tadppte nahi dekh paaya to gala ghot maar daala”.

It is reported in the impugned news item that a couple decided to commit suicide as their marriage was not acceptable by the family members. Reporting that a 37 year old lady, who had been residing separately from her husband for the last two years is having an affair with a 23-year-old student, who was her neighbour. Since the family members were against the marriage they decided to commit suicide and the lady consumed sulfas (Poison) in the presence of his lover and began to wriggle in pain. Unable to see her in pain, the lover strangled her with a wire of mobile charger.

The complainant (husband of deceased lady) submitted that the impugned news item is totally false, baseless and concocted, and paper has used highly unreasonable, derogatory and cheap language about married woman. He denied that his wife Smt. Renu (deceased) was living separately from him for the last two years and that the accused and Smt. Renu were seeking permission from their parents for their marriage. The complainant vide letter dated 23.11.2016 and subsequent reminder dated 24.11.2016 requested the respondent to publish corrigendum in the same column, same page, same place with proper intimation to him, but did not get response from the paper. The complainant requested the Council to take necessary action against the respondent for publishing a false and concocted story.

A Show Cause notice was issued to the respondent Editor on 15.12.2016

Written Statement

In response to the Show Cause Notice the respondent editor vide his letter dated 3.7.2017 has submitted that the complaint is baseless and frivolous. According to the respondent paper the news article in question was published on the basis of the FIR No. 696 dated 20.11.2016 filed by the complainant, Smt. Anita (Sister of Renu) registered under section 302 of IPC in Bindapur District, South West Delhi. The article was researched and well founded on the basis of official documents available with the reporter. It is pertinent to note that in the FIR, the complainant has herself admitted that the accused was known to the complainant, Shri Dinesh Chander and victim, Smt. Renu. The respondent has requested the Council to dismiss the complaint as it has no grounds to go further with proceedings. Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 12.07.2017 at New Delhi. The complainant, Shri Dinesh Chander appeared in person. The Respondent Shri Arun Pathak, Advocate appeared on behalf of respondent editor.

The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant as also the Counsel for the respondent. First and foremost, it is not the mandate of the Council to determine the veracity of the contents of the impugned report but only to determine whether in publishing it. The respondent was guided by the component of ethical reporting and had sufficient basis for writing it. It is the plea of the respondent that the impugned news item is based on the report given to the police by the sister of the deceased as also the accused who had committed the crime. The Inquiry Committee even while recording that the newspaper need not have disclosed the identity of the deceased holds that the respondent newspaper while publishing has not violated journalistic ethics so as to call for action under section 14(1) of the Act. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint.

Held

Item No. 26 F.No.14/549/16-17-PCI.

Complaint Respondent

Smt. Arti Agrawal, The Editor, Councillor, Ward No.40, Semaria Express, Subhash Park, Satna (M.P.) Satna (M.P.).

Adjudication 21.09.17

This complaint dated 23.2.2017 has been filed by Smt. Aarti Agrawal, Councillor, Satna (M.P.) against “Semaria Express”for allegedly publishing false, misleading and defamatory news item under the caption “सतना िम ह◌ा पमौ र िमिम ता पा णणनय नन नगर ननगिम कमिम शनर कक 28 दिदसमबर कक दिदय न एफ.आई.आर. कन आिदनश – आरतत अग्रवा ल कन ल◌ा पता रहनन कन िदमौ र◌ा न क◌ा पा रथदि◌ भता बनटन आशतर अग्रवा ल कन न◌ा िम सन ननका लनन क◌ा िम ◌ा िम ला ” in its issue dated 3.1.2017. It was reported in the impugned news item that the Mayor has passed orders for filing an FIR in the matter of taking payment of Councillor allowance in the name of Smt. Aarti Agarwal, Councillor’s son during her disappearance for nine months. In the meantime, Municipal Commissioner verbally informed the Mayor that he has not given approval for joining to Smt. Agrawal and he is not aware how she resumed her post. It was further reported that one Shri Ashish Agrawal has taken Councillor allowance amounting to Rs.6,200/- every month during Smt. Agrawal disappearance. It was also reported that the Municipal Commissioner wrote a letter to the State Government on 31.3.2016 for declaring Smt. Agrawal as incapable. According to the impugned news item, the husband of the complainant, Raju Agrawal practised tantra-mantra only thereafter the complainant has returned home. It was further reported that the husband of the complainant doubts her character. Denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news item, the complainant has stated that neither she ever disappeared nor anyone took on her behalf allowance. According to the complainant, she is reputed person in the society and her husband, Shri Raju @ Vijay Agrawal was also a former Councillor and social worker. The complainant alleged that the respondent is habitual of blackmailing the reputed people in the garb of journalism. The complainant informed that the respondent also published defamatory and false news against her earlier on 7.6.2015. The complainant submitted that the respondent was requested on 9.1.2017 to publish contradiction but to no avail. She has requested the Council to take necessary action in the matter.

Show-cause notice issued to the Respondent-Editor, Semaria Express, Satna on 14.3.2017. Written Statement of Semaria Express

The Editor, Semaria Express, Satna vide his written statement dated 31.3.2017 while denying the allegations has alleged that the complaint is false, baseless and filed with a view to pressurise him. According to the respondent, the action for eliminating the complainant from the Councillor seat is under process at Administration level. The Municipal Commissioner wrote a letter to the Principal Secretary, State Development and Environment Department, Govt. of M.P., Bhopal on 31.3.2016 with regard to complainant’s continuous absence in the Municipal Council but no action was taken due to BJP’s MLA, Shri Shankar Lal Tiwari. Thereafter, Mayor of Satna wrote a letter in this regard to the Principal Secretary, Govt. of M.P. on 28.12.2016. The respondent alleged that the complainant and her husband with a view to pressurise him have been filing false complaints against him. The respondent further alleged that the complainant and her husband attacked him on 4.8.2016 due to which he was admitted in hospital but police registered normal Section 325 IPC under the influence of BJP’s MLA, Shri Shankarlal Tiwari, however, the learned court change that section into 326 IPC. The matter is now pending consideration before the court of law. The respondent further informed that he filed a petition No.245/2017 before Hon’ble High Court of Jabalpur for removing her from the Councillor seat due to illegally withdrawing the Councillor’s allowance by her son, which is pending consideration. The respondent alleged that so many criminal cases are pending against the complainant’s husband.

The complainant vide her further letter dated 6.4.2017 has informed that the respondent, instead of sending his reply to the Show-Cause Notice issued by the Press Council, has sent a copy of his newspaper issue dated 28.3.2017.

A copy of the written statement was forwarded to the complainant on 18.4.2017.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following two adjournments, the matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 13.7.2017 at New Delhi. Mrs. Arti Agarwal, Complainant alongwith her advocate Mr. Vishnu Gupta appeared before the Inquiry Committee while Shri Parvesh Sharma, represented respondent Editor.

It is an admitted position that respondent Editor has filed public interest litigation in the High Court for the removal of the complaint. Further the newspaper had published story concerning the private life of the complainant.

The inquiry Committee is of the opinion that respondent Editor is using the newspaper to malign the complainant due to personal animosity. The Inquiry Committee further finds no justification in publishing story concerning the private life of the complainant.

For all these reasons the Inquiry Committee recommends that respondent newspaper be censured . It is worth mentioning that respondent newspaper has also been censured by the Council in another case F. No. 14/415/16-17-PCI for publishing false story.

A copy of this order be forwarded to the Director General, DAVP, Director, Information and Public relations, Government of MP and the District Magistrate, Satna for the appropriate action.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons, findings and adopts the Report of the Committee and decides to Censure the respondent newspapers, Semariya Express. A copy of this order be forwarded to the Director General, DAVP, Director, Information and Public Relations, Government of MP and the District Magistrate, Satna for the appropriate action.

PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA Sl.No. 27 F.No.14/415/16-17-PCI

Complainant Respondent Shri Hariom Gupta, The Editor, Director, Semariya Express, Super Channel, Satna. Satna.

ADJUDICATION Dated: 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 9.11.2016 has been filed by Shri Hariom Gupta, Director, Super Channel, Satna against the Editor, Semariya Express alleging publication of a series of false and fabricated news item which reads as follows: S.No Caption Dated . 1. हररओिम गखपता क◌ा गखग◌ा थ पकड़◌ा या 11.10.2016 सखपर चचैनल कक◌ी आड़ मि◌ व कनबल क◌ा का रकबा र कर रहन रन 2. हररओिम कक 40 हज़ा र 25 .10.2016 ककस का िम कन बिदलन िदनतन रन सखपर चचैनल कन एमि◌ णत गनत भचैया 3. हररओिम न◌ा िम जिद 1.11 .2016 4. हररओिम च◌ा य पा न बनचनन वा लल कन बत च हह पलन हह 8.11 .2016 & 25.2.2 01 6 5. अन ◌ा ज िम वंण त क◌ा बर िदा ना वय◌ा पा रह दिदवामलया 26.2.2 01 6

In the aforesaid series of news items, the paper has allegedly depicted the complainant in negative light. The impugned news items reports that the complainant is a cable operator and in the garb of this occupation, he supplies girls to management of cement factories and in this racket, girls of Prajapita Brahmakumaries are also involved. It is further reported in the impugned news items that he along with other two persons tried to kill the editor Shri Sharad Audichya of Semaria Express by hitting his Car but when he managed to escape, they again attacked him with rods. The complainant submitted that the editor of Semariya Express contacted him on his mobile for advertisement for which he expressed his inability. Due to denial of advertisements, the respondent started vilification campaign against him by publishing allegedly false, baseless and defamatory news items along with his photograph and his name. The complainant vide letter dated 26.10.2016 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned publications but no clarification has been published. A Show Cause Notice dated 6.1.2017 was issued to the respondent editor, Semariya Express, Satna.

Written Statement The respondent vide its written statement dated 13.7.2017 submitted that the news items are based on true facts. The complainant operates cable network illegally and allegation of theft in a criminal case no.0743/2016 U/S 379 is registered against him at Mehar Police Station, Satna. Denying the allegation that the paper called up to solicit the advertisement, the paper submits that a call was in fact made to solicit complainant’s version vis-à-vis impugned news. Further, the complainant has attempted to kill the respondent and the matter in this regard is registered in the city Kotwali and pending before the court.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 13.7.2017 at New Delhi followed by adjournment dated 16.5.2017. The complainant appeared in person whereas Shri Parvesh Sharma represented the respondent. It is the allegation of the complainant that as he declined to give advertisement to the respondent newspaper, it has started writing false stories against him. In one of the stories, the respondent newspaper has stated that the complainant supplies girls to the officers of the cement factory. The Inquiry Committee called upon the respondent to produce any material to support the publication of the said news. He is unable to do so. No basis has been produced for the second story against the complainant either. The Inquiry Committee is inclined to accept the allegation of the complainant that when he did not give advertisement, the respondent newspaper is targeting him by publishing false stories. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that it is a fit case, in which the respondent newspaper be censured. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for censure of the newspaper, Semariya Express.

The complainant has produced before the Inquiry Committee, an application filed before the District Magistrate, Satna for taking action against the respondent newspaper for various illegal acts committed in terms of the provisions of the Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867. It is the assertion of the complainant that till date no action has been taken. The Inquiry Committee directs the District Magistrate to take appropriate action in accordance with law on the letter dated 7.11.2006 filed by the complainant before him, within a period of eight weeks and a copy of the decision so taken be communicated to the Council.

A copy of this order be forwarded to the Director General, DAVP, Director, Information and Public Relations, Government of MP and the District Magistrate, Satna for the appropriate action.

It has further come to the notice of the Inquiry Committee that the respondent newspaper has been censured in a large number of cases by the Council. The District Magistrate may consider taking proper action as provided under the Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and Report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons, findings and adopts the Report of the Committee and decides to Censure the respondent newspaper, Semariya Express. Along with other directions detailed above, a copy of this order be forwarded to the Director General, DAVP, Director, Information and Public Relations, Government of MP and the District Magistrate, Satna for the appropriate action. PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

Sl. No. 28 F.No.14/286/14-15-PCI

Shri Naveen Gupta, The Editor, Chandigarh. Nagarvani, Chandigarh.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 12.6.2014 has been filed by Shri Naveen Gupta, Chandigarh against the editor, Nagarvani, Chandigarh alleging publication of a false and baseless news item under the caption “Channel ka hawala de kar ki lakhon ki thagi” in its issue dated 27.5.2014. It is reported in the impugned news item that the complainant swindled Rs. 20 lacs in the name of Delhi based popular music and news channel by duping one Shri Jeevan Gupta. Shri Jeevan Gupta has knocked the door of Inspector General of Police, Chandigarh to get back his money. Denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news item the complainant submitted that the news item is totally false, fabricated and malicious and published with an intention to defame and blackmail him. The complainant submitted that he has a dispute with Shri Jeevan Gupta for money and has got a case registered in this regard before JMIC, Chandigarh U/s 138 against him and the Court has issued Non- bailable warrant/summon against Shri Jeeven and others. The complainant submitted that the respondent published the impugned news item without pre- verification. He has issued a legal notice to him with a request to publish unconditional written apology and regret within seven days but no response was received by him. No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor, Nagarvani on 7.8.2014, but the same was received back in the Council with postal remarks “Addressee left”. The Notice was again sent through Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Chandigarh with a request to serve the notice through their postal service agency on 12.9.2014, but received no response. The Show Cause Notice along with its enclosures were also E-mailed to the respondent on [email protected] on 8.6.2015 with a Time Bound Reminder dated 29.3.2016, but to no avail. Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following two adjournments dated 9.6.2016 and 4.10.2016, the matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 13.7.2017 at New Delhi.

Despite service of notice, neither the complainant nor the respondent has chosen to appear. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and all other connected papers and is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further.

The Inquiry Committee recommends to the Council to dismiss the complaint.

Held

SI. No. 29 F.No.14/292/16-17/PCI

Complainant Respondent Ms. P A Lucia, The Editor, Advocate, Dinakaran, Tamil Nadu Tamil Daily Newspaper, Pondicherry.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 7.9.2016 has been filed by Ms. P A Lucia, Advocate, Villulpuram, Tamil Nadu against the Editor, Dinakaran, Puducherry alleging publication of false, fabricated and concocted news item in its issue dated 9.6.2016 under the caption “Petition filed before the Judge by a businessmen to take action against an advocate”, as per transaction is provided by the complainant. It is reported in the news item that a scrap merchant by name Thirusaraselvm filed a petition before the District Judge Sarojini Devi that he has a dispute with Sairam and filed a complaint before police on the issue. Advocate, Lucia intervened in the matter to prevent the police from taking action. This is adversely affected his business. It is also reported that Advocate, Lucia has threatened the police that she would prefer complaint before the higher officers. Action may be taken against the advocate Lucia to remove her from Bar Council of Villuperam. The District Judge has received the complaint and ordered an inquiry. Denying the allegation levelled in the impugned news item the complainant submitted that the news item is false, fabricated and concocted and published and without due verification of the basic records. The complainant has submitted that neither the name appearing in the news item “Thiruaraselvam” is a scrap merchant nor the aggrieved party has been removed from the Bar Council of Villupuram. The complainant further submitted that the impugned news item has caused immense loss of Reputation and affected her career. The complainant vide letter dated 27.6.2016 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned publication with a request to publish apology in the same page, same size but no response was received.

No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor, Dinakaran on 6.10.2016 but no Written Statement has been filed.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following an adjournment dated 14.3.2017, the matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 13.7.2017 at New Delhi. Neither the complainant nor the respondent has chosen to appear.

Despite service of notice the complainant has not chosen to appeare. On earlier occasions also she had not chosen to do so. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and the connected papers and not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for the dismissal of the complaint.

Held

Item No. 30 F.No.14/433/16-17-PCI

Complainant Respondent Shri Shivnath Ram, The Editor, Palamu, Jharkhand. Hindustan, Ranchi. Adjudication

Dated21.9.2017 This complaint has been filed by Shri Shivnath Ram, Palamu, Jharkhand against the editor, Hindustan alleging publication of a misleading, false and baseless news item in its issue dated 30.7.2016 under the caption “घ˛˛˛स द#कर म'ल) न+कर), बर.स1 ह3न# पर ख़7दक7 श9”. It is reported in the impugned news item that Shri Chandan Kumar Ravi committed suicide on losing his job in IRB as the government found manipulation in appointments. Reporting that the victim had borrowed three lakh rupees on interest to give bribe for the job and the loss of employment made him upset as he was unable to repay loan and thus he committed suicide.

Denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news item, the complainant submitted that his deceased son, Chandan Kumar was selected for the post of cook in IRB and after government took a decision regarding removal of the batch of selected candidates his son came back to home. On 19.7.2016 he felt ill and was admitted in Sadar hospital where he got treatment for three days and after seeing no improvement in his condition he was shifted to RIMS Ranchi on 21.7.2016 where he took his last breath. The respondent published the false and defamatory news about his son to defame him and family in the eyes of public and society. The complainant further submitted that they never took money on interest for giving bribe and his son has not committed suicide, as reported. His death was normal.

A Show Cause Notice was issued to the Respondent Editor, Hindustan, Ranchi on 20.1.2017.

Written Statement

In response to Show Cause Notice a letter, on behalf of respondent Editor, dated 10.7.2017 has been received from the respondent attaching a copy of the concerned correspondent retreating the statement made in the impugned publication and further informing that after publication of impugned news item, respondent has published the version of the complainant five times in the Hindustan newspaper.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

Following an adjournment dated 16.5.2017, the matter came before Inquiry Committee for hearing on 13.7.2017. Shri Shambhu Paswan appeared on behalf of complainant. Shri Arun Pathak, Advocate, appeared for the respondent.

Shri Shambhu Paswan, authorised by the complainant has appeared before the Inquiry Committee buy was unable to take anything beyond the submission on record. Shri Pathak on behalf of the respondent produced before the Inquiry Committee the clarification published by the newspaper with reference to the impugned news item.

In view of the clarification made by the newspaper, the Inquiry Committee is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee accordingly recommends for the dismissal of the complaint.

Held

Sl.No. 31 F. No. 14/496/16-17-PCI

Shri Ved Prakash, The Editor, Secretary of Shri Mangal Singh Vs. Dainik Tribune, Prachin Shiv Mandir Society, Chandigarh, Gurgaon.

ADJUDICATION Dated: 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 04.02.2017, has been filed by Shri Ved Prakash, Secretary, Shri Mangal Singh Prachin Shiv Mandir Society, Gurgaon against the Editor, Dainik Tribune, alleging publication of highly objectionable news item under the caption: “Debango ne Mandir par Lagaya Taale”.

The impugned news item reports that members of the previous committee of the temple first destroyed the havan kund, then destroyed the Mandir Board and finally closed down the doors of the temple. It is further reported that Mandir Trust and members have misappropriated the funds of the temple. Erstwhile Temple Committee is allegedly baffled ever since this exposure has been made. It is now being claimed that a new Temple Committee has been formed. In view of frequent disputes, public has demanded that Administration appoint a Receiver.

Denying the allegations in the impugned item, the complainant, Shri Ved Prakash submitted that the respondent editor received this information from Shri Fateh Uajala who is a member of the aforesaid society and also a journalist. The complainant also denied they appropriated money in the name of old Shiv Mandir. He further submitted that the Havan Kund destroyed by them was built by priests of the temple in connivance with some anti-social elements and it was set up in the middle of the entrance gate, which caused difficulty to the devotees. The complainant vide letter dated 06.11.2016 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news item and clarified the facts.

The Council received another communication dated 18.05.2017 from the Shri Fateh Singh, member of aforesaid society and also a journalist, whereby he has submitted that the complainant has filed the complaint with an intention to malign him and tarnish his image.

Written Statement

A show case Notice was issued to respondent editor on 26.04.2017, in response to the Council’s Show Cause Notice, the respondent editor Dainik Tribune, Chandigarh vide written statement dated 18.05.2017 has submitted that the reporting done by Dainik Tribune with respect to news in question was based on facts and published without any malafide. The news item being objected to by the complainant shows that nobody including the complainant, allegedly responsible for the wrong acts, has been named in the news report and as such the grievance being raised by the complainant is misconceived. The respondent further submitted that the allegations levelled by the complainant against the newspaper are without any basis and as such are liable to be rejected by the Council. A copy of the written statement war forwarded to the complainant on 29.05.2017 for counter comments.

Counter comments

The complainant vide letter dated 15.6.2017 submitted that the respondent made the publication on the basis of information given by Shri Fateh Singh Ujala, correspondent to the police and without any proof on the action taken by the police. He also submitted that the complaint filed by the society is based on facts instead of conspiracy. The aim of the society is to further the objectives of the society and not to indulge in conspiracy against any person.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for final hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 13.7.2017 at New Delhi. There was no appearance on behalf of the complainant whereas Shri Amit Sharma, Head-Legal & Administration represented the respondent paper. The Inquiry Committee has heard the representative of the respondent and also perused the complaint, the written statement and other connected papers. The representative of the respondent states that letter dated 6.11.2016, which forms part of the complaint and was addressed to the editor of the newspaper, has not been received in the office. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the respondent newspaper should consider the version given by the complainant in his letter dated 6.11.2016 and publish clarification according to their editorial policy within six weeks. The Inquiry Committee directs for disposal of the complaint with the aforesaid direction.

SI. No.32 F.No.14/44-45/17-18-PCI

Complainant Respondent

Ms. Sangeeta Kumari The Editor, Raftaar, 907 Moti Chowk, Mhow District, Indore, M.P.

The Editor, Punjab Kesari, Civil Lines, Jalandhar-144 001 Punjab.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 28.4.2017 has been filed by Ms. Sangeeta Kumar, IIT Kanpur Graduate stating that the editors of Dainik Bhaskar, Dainik Jagran, Punjab Kesari, Raftaar published a news under the caption “A girl suicide case from NIT Patna”. These respondents published her photograph instead of the concerned girl, who committed suicide. She further informed that Dainik Bhaskar and Dainik Jagran withdrew the news from their online portal after request, but Punjab Kesari, Raftaar have been still continuing to show her photograph with the impugned news. She has also stated that the error led to her embarrassment and there have been repeated attacks on her character and reputation. Serious errors of this nature is causing great distress to all her kin. The complainant stated that many times she conveyed respondent newspapers about the lapse occurred on their part but they did not rectify the same. She stated that even after personally pointing out the lapse through telephonic conversations, with the concerned employees of respondent newspapers but no action has been taken by them. She has requested to direct the papers publish public apology which should get the same prominence as the impugned news.

Show Cause Notices were issued to the respondent Editors, “Raftaar”, Indore, M.P. and “Punjab Kesari”, Jalandhar, Punjab on 22.5.2017. The “Raftar” Indore has not filed written statement in the matter.

Written Statement of Punjab Kesari

The respondent vide letter dated 24.6.2017 submitted that the impugned news-item displayed on the online edition of newspaper was uploaded on the basis of news-item appearing in the online edition of Daily Bhaskar and has been displayed by the Punjab Kesari in the ordinary course of the business of newspaper bonfide as a news-item without any suspicion or doubt that the news is carrying photograph of a person other than one who has committed the suicide regarding, whom the news- item pertains. It could never be believed that a responsible newspaper like Bhaskar is carrying a wrong photograph. The respondent, Punjab Kesari expressed regret for the inadvertently lapse. The respondent paper submitted that it has still not able to trace/obtain photograph of ill fated and unlucky deceased student. The respondent further stated that when the mistake came to their knowledge, the said picture was immediately removed from online edition.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 13.07.2017 at New Delhi. No one has appeared for the complainant. Shri Rajesh Kawl, Business Manager, Punjab Kesari Group of Newspapers, Delhi, appeared for the respondent.

It is assertion of the complainant that Punjab Kesari, Raftaar, Dainik Bhaskar and Dainik Jagran published a news in respect of suicide of a girl studying in NIT and instead of publishing the photograph of the girl who had committed the suicide, her photograph had been published. She has further stated that when the attention of the Dainik Bhaskar and Dainik Jagran was drawn to the aforesaid fact, they had withdrawn her photograph but the respondent Punjab Kesari and Raftaar have not chosen to do so. Reply has been filed on behalf of the Punjab Kesari in which it had been stating that when the mistake came to the notice of the newspaper, it also withdrew the photograph of the complainant.

There is no reply on behalf of the editor of Raftaar. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Inquiry Committee directs the respondent editor, Raftaar to take remedial steps to mitigate the grievance of the complainant. The Inquiry Committee recommends for disposal of the complaint with the aforesaid directions.

Held

Shri Bijendra Sharma, Vs. The Editor, Daya Medicos, Hind Darshan, Saaptahik Samachar, Muzaffarnagar, Muzaffarnagar, U.P. U.P.

ADJUDICATION Dated: 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 09.12.2016 has been filed by Shri Bijendra Sharma, Daya Medicos, Muzaffarnagar, U.P. against the Editor, Hind Darshan, Saaptahik Samachar, Muzaffarnagar, U.P. alleging publication of defamatory, false, baseless and concocted news item under caption” Chemist Association me bhi ghaddaar, Saade char lakh me badal gye sample”

It has been reported in the impugned news item that the Chemist Association, which claims to fight for Chemists, is actually indulging in corrupt activities. It is reported that the samples of spurious medicines from three Chemist shops which were taken by a team headed by Assistant Commissioner, were later replaced by giving bribe of Rs. 4.5 lacs. It is reported that Medical Inspector converted four crore black money to white money in which Shri Bijendra Sharma alleged to have played an important role. The complainant is alleged to have acquired money from different organizations.

Denying the allegations, the complainant, Shri Bijendra Sharma submitted that the aforesaid allegations are baseless, defamatory and published with the intention to malign his image vide letter dated 25.07.2016, the complainant requested the respondent to publish a corrigendum in the matter, but no response was received. The complainant further requested the Council to take strict action against the respondent Editor.

A Show Cause notice was issued to the respondent Editor on 08.03.2017, but no response was filed.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 13.7.2017 at New Delhi. The complainant was not present whereas Shri Rishipal, Editor appeared in person. Despite service of notice, the complainant has not chosen to appear. The respondent is present. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and other connected papers and is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint.

F. No. 14/328/16-17-PCI

Sl. No. 34 Shri Surender Singh Jain, The Editor, Harda Dainik Jagran, Bhopal, M.P.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 27.9.2016 has been filed by Shri Surender Singh Jain, former Chairman, Municipal Council, Harda through his advocate against the editor, Dainik Jagran, Bhopal alleging publication of false, baseless and fabricated news item in its issue dated 9.9.2016 under the caption “aap ne to dubo diya shehar ko, janta aur bhajpa ko”.

The paper in the aforesaid news item has allegedly reported the corrupt activities of the complainant as Chairman of Municipal Council, Harda after the BJP won the Municipal Corporation Election. It has been reported that the people of the Harda region are now repenting to elect the complainant as 11 months have been passed but there has been no significant work done by him. Not only public but his party colleagues are unhappy with him. Another allegation on him referred in impugned news item is that he openly threatens to register FIR against whosoever critises him. He has misused the public fund.

According to the complainant, the impugned news item has been intentionally published by the paper in connivance with his opponent to malign him in eyes of public as well as his party. To substantiate this fact, he informed that in past, the paper had been publishing factual news relating to him as well as Municipal Council: and the paper had come out with a special edition in July 2016 highlighting developmental work undertaken by Municipal Corporation, Harda in past eleven months and appreciating his role. The complainant was taken aback to see another impugned news item within a span of two months unexpectedly projecting him in bad light. This aptly makes clear that he has been vilified by the paper at the behest of his opponents who “have certainly offered” paper some consideration. The complainant drew the attention of the respondent on 27.9.2016 but received no reply. He has requested the Council to take necessary action in the matter.

No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent editor, Dainik Jagran, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. on 29.11.2016 but no written statement has been filed. Report of the Inquiry Committee Following two adjournments dated 19.6.2017 and 7.2.2017, when the respondent appeared, the matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 16.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. There was no appearance from either side.

During the hearing of the complaint it had come to the notice of the Inquiry Committee on 07.02.2017 that a feature “Harda Vikas Yatra” had been published in the respondent newspaper in July 2016 acclaiming the good works said to have been carried out by the wife of the complainant as Chair- person, Municipal Committee, Harda. The representative of the respondent has before the Inquiry Committee stated that the said stories were advertisements given by the wife of the complainant, Smt. Sadhna Surendra Jain in the above capacity. The Inquiry Committee took suo- motu cognizance of the case as the impugned publication prime facie appeared to be articles by the respondent and directed for issuance of notice to the respondent newspaper. Despite service of notice the respondent newspaper has not chosen to appear to defend the allegations. The Inquiry Committee has perused the ‘said advertisements’ and is of the opinion that the publication about the work done by Smt. SadhnaSurendra Jain do not look like advertisements but news items/articles.It therefore flows from the above that the respondent newspaper has published the advertisements in the form of a news and therefore the Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that they clearly constitute paid news. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends to the Council to Censure the respondent newspaper for the unethical conduct. As regards to the original complaint, the Inquiry Committee did not find any merit in the same as the complainant had sought to draw a comparison with report cited above and recommends for its dismissal.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Censure the respondent editor, Dainik Jagran, Bhopal, M.P for publishing paid news in July 2016 edition. A copy of the order be forwarded to the Director General, DAVP, the Director, Information and Public Relations Department, M.P. the District Magistrate, M.P. and RNI for appropriate action. It also accepts the recommendation of the Inquiry Committee in dismissing the original complaint filed by the complainant on merits.

PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

SI.No. 35 F.No.14/39/17-18-PCI

Complainant Respondent Shri C.S. Chauhan, The Editor, State President, Rawat Rajput Sandesh, Jaipur, Rajasthan. Ajmer.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 25.04.2017 has been filed by Shri C.S. Chauhan, State President, Rajasthan Rawat Rajput Mahasabha, Jaipur, Rajasthan against the editor, Rawat Rajput Sandesh alleging publication of a false baseless and defamatory news item in its issue dated 4.12.2016 under the caption “Mahasabha Adhyaksh ne ki Godawato par apmaan janak teepani. In the impugned news item it has been represented that the complainant, Shri C.S. Chauhan, while addressing the people in the premises of temple, has stated that Godawat has followed Muslim traditions up to three generations. This statement was immediately objected to by the editor, Shri Bhagwan Singh Chauhan even then, the complainant reiterated his statement disparaging of Godawat Community. It is further reported in the impugned news item that the complainant demeaned the history of Godawat community and damaged its reputation. In his comments, the complainant has submitted that he has never used such an objectionable words that lead to communal violence. The complainant has further submitted that in his speech he mentioned about the two brothers who served under the kingdom of Muslim Badhsah and rules imposed by that ruler were followed by both the brothers. Generation of both the brothers are part and parcel, hence, Kathat & Godat are real brothers. They should come together and join hands for economic and social development of both clans. But, the respondent editor incited the Godawat clan to oppose his statement and support in the statement of respondent editor. The complainant has submitted that he sent a Regd. Letter on 6.4.2017 to the editor to publish a clarification in this regard, but the letter was received back undelivered with remark “refused”. Further, the complainant has requested the Council to take action against the respondent. No Written Statement A Show Cause notice was issued to the respondent editor on 29.06.2017 but no response received. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 16.08.2017 at Ahmedabad. The complainant, Shri C.S.Chauhan appeared in person and Shri Tribhuwan Narayan Singh appeared for the respondent. The complainant claims to be the President of the Rawat Rajput Mahasabha and his grievance is that the speech given by him has been distorted and published in the respondent newspaper. It is the assertion of the complainant that he wrote to the editor about the same but no action has been taken. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and perused the record. The complainant in his letter to the editor has nowhere explained as to how and in what manner his speech has been distorted. The Inquiry Committee finds no substance in the grievance of the complainant and accordingly, recommends for its dismissal.

F.NO. 14/421/16-17-PCI SI.No 36

Complainant Respondent Shri Pramod Sahu, The Editor, Thana Prabhari ParivarikDastak, Thana Kotwali, Mahu DastakBhawan, Nandlalpura Indore, MP. Indore, MP.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017 This undated complaint has been filed by Shri Pramod Sahu, Thana Prabhari, Thana Kotwali, Mahu, Indore, MP against the Editor of Parivarik Dastak, Indore for allegedly publishing untrue and baseless news item in its issue dated 2.11.2016 captioned “thana prabhari ke sanrakshan me khule aam bik rahi hain brown sugar” which states that the brown sugar dealers are operating under Police protection and are not at all scared of any legal action against them. Police authorities silent on the issue . Brown sugar is being sold for Rs. 150-200 and customers are coming from various places to purchase and consume brown sugar inside Govt. toilets. The impugned article claims that police even after knowing everything is not taking any action thereby encouraging the dealers to thrive in this illegal business. In another issue dated 11.11.2016 captioned “gat dino chori ke mamle main T.I . Khamosh”states that ever since SHO, Mahu has been appointed as incharge of Mahu Police station by the DIG, Indore, the situation has deteriorated in Mahu. In his present tenure at Mahu, different anti-social elements under the police protection has gained more power and the area has become a breeding ground for anti-social activities like theft, illegal trades and claims that the SHO is incompetent in managing the administration system and paving his way for a transfer. The complainant alleges that the newspaper is publishing untrue facts and defaming the Police administration. He further submits that he has written a letter to the editor of the respondent newspaper asking to publish clarification, but did not receive any response and therefore pleaded the Council to take action.

A Show Cause Notice was issued on 11.1.2017 to the respondent paper but no Written Statement has been received.

Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 16.08.2017 at Ahmedabad. No one has appeared for the complainant and Shri Abdul Rehman Khan, Advocate, appeared for the respondent. Despite service of notice the complainant has not chosen to appear. The respondent is represented by Mr. Abdul Rehman Khan, Advocate. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and all other connected papers and has also heard the Counsel for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee finds no merit in the grievance made by the complainant. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint.

Held

Sl. No. 37 F.No.14/548/16-17-PCI

Shri Ram Prasad Patel, The Editor, President, Hari Bhoomi, Gram Vikas Sanstha. M.P. Sagar, M.P.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 1.03.2017 has been filed by Shri Ram Prasad Patel, President, Gram Vikar Sanstha, Sagar, M.P. against the Editor, Hari Bhoomi, Bhopal , M.P. alleging publication of false and incorrect news item in the issue dated 28.02.2017 under the caption” “Garib Vikas Sanstha ka karnama, Ïllaj Ke Naam Aamet Gaon Mein Ho Rha Farjivada Jhopdi mein homeopathy aushadhlya. ”

It is reported in the impugned news item that people are being fleeced in name of free treatment by the organisers of the Homeopathic Hospital registered with the Authority. In an investigation, it has come to light that patients are being charged Rs.30 as registration fee for treatment. It has further reported that this organization was given permission on 08.09.2016 to open clinics in two districts i.e.Gyaraspur and Rahatgarh but permission was cancelled after 13 days, still the clinic is being run.

Denying the allegations, the complainant has submitted that the respondent Editor has published the impugned news item without verifying the facts. He has further submitted that the clinic is registered with the Authority as per the rules and regulation and people of Sagar district are satisfied with the functioning of the clinic. There is a conspiracy against the clinic to shut it down. The complainant has submitted that the respondent has published the impugned news item with the intention to malign the image of the Homeopathic Hospital. The complainant vide letter dated 1.3.2017 drew the attention of the respondent to publish the correct version of the matter but received no response. The complainant further requested the Council to take necessary action against the respondent and also has requested to cancel the respondent license.

No Written Statement

A Show Cause Notice was issued to the Respondent Editor, Hari Bhoomi, Bhopal, M.P. on 17.04.2017, but received no response.

Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 16.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. There was no appearance from either side. It is the allegation of the complainant that the news item has been published in the respondent newspaper in its issue dated 28.02.2017 in which it has been stated that the complainant is charging fee for treatment and the permission to run the clinic was given only for two Districts earlier. But the same was cancelled after 13 days, still the complainant is running the clinic. It is the assertion of the complainant that the aforesaid news item has been published without verifying the facts. It is further asserted that the clinic is registered with authority and in fact the people of Sagar District are satisfied with its functioning. Despite service of notice neither the complainant nor the respondent has chosen to appear. The respondent has also not filed his Written Statement. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the complainant be given liberty to give it’s version to the respondent. Accordingly, the Inquiry Committee directs the complainant to give his version to the respondent newspaper within 8 weeks from today. The respondent newspaper, in turn, is directed to publish the same with necessary editing within two weeks of the receipt the version from the complainant.

The Inquiry Committee directs for disposal of the complaint with the aforesaid direction.

Held

The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Dispose of the complaint with the aforesaid directions.

PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA Sl. No. 38 F.No. 14/509/16-17-PCI

Prof. S.K. Jain, The Editor, Vice-Chancellor, Dainik Bhaskar, Rajeev Gandhi Prodyogiki Vishwavidyalya, Bhopal, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

The complaint dated 10.02.2017 has been filed by Prof. S.K. Jain, Vice Chancellor Rajeev Gandhi Prodyogiki Vishwavidyalya, against the editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh allegedly for his character assassination by publishing a news item against him under the caption ‘आर जतपत वत कन रजजसस ◌ा र पर छनड़ छ◌ाड़ का अर कप’ in its issue dated 10.02.2017. It is reported in the impugned news item that staff of Rajeev Gandhi Prodyogiki Vishwavidyalya, has levelled allegation against Shri S.K. Jain, Vice- Chancellor for eve teasing and oppression. The association of teachers and officers has filed complaint before the State Minister of Technical Education in this regard. In this complaint while referring to an old matter, his attitude towards the women has been highlighted. Keeping in view his past behaviour towards women, lady teachers and girl student apprehend reoccurrence of such incidents. The association has demanded his immediate removal from service so that prestige of University can be saved. The complainant alleged that the impugned news item has cast aspersions on his character. He is in acute mental agony due to the impugned report which has badly affected his social prestige. He requested for justifiable action against the newspaper for his character assassination. The complainant vide letter dated 10.02.2017 drew the attention of the respondent seeking copy of proof for the allegations as alleged in the report.

A Show Cause Notice as issued to the respondent editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh on 27.03.2017.

Written Statement

The respondent vide his written statement dated 10.04.2017 while denying the allegations submitted that the news doesn’t relate to the Vice Chancellor of the University. The incumbent of the said post was not related to the designation or the person concerned for the post. The news is based on complaint filed by the teachers and officers of the college before the State Minister of Technology and Skill Development Department of the Madhya Pradesh Government and also on a complaint made by a lady professor to State Women Commission as well as to the Chief Secretary of the said Deptt. Further, information provided by the office Principal, Engineering College, Ujjain to the Technical Education Organiser, M.P. in this connection was also taken into consideration while covering the impugned news. The news was published in good faith and is on public interest. There was no motive to defame anybody in the news. He further informed that the reply has been filed to the Notice of the Complainant and copy of the proof of the complaints filed against him for the news was also sent to him. The version of the complainant was also published prominently in the news also. He submitted that the complaint is baseless and requested to close the matter.

Counter comments

The complainant vide letter dated 18.04.2017 submitted that the information provided by the respondent is false and misleading. The complainant has informed that the complaint filed by the lady professor in 2011 Was closed by the Women Commission for not being based on facts and to publish the news item in 2017 on the basis of the said complaint is an act of conspiracy to defame him. The Chief Secretary, Technical Educational Deptt., M.P. Govt. has also closed the matter after investigating the matter in question. In the news item, false and baseless facts with regard to Teacher’s Association were mentioned without inquiry. He further submitted that Shri Radhe Shyam, correspondent of the respondent newspaper entered Confidential Degree Section without permission on 07.02.2017 and took photographs. On objecting to his entry without requisite permission, he said that we are journalist and can go and take photo/video anywhere, nobody can stop us. The correspondent forcefully took photograph of the complainant without his consent and has published photo alongside the news report. Further, his version on the news was published in concocted way. The respondent has not provided any proof for the allegations of the news item till date nor in response to the Show Cause Notice. The complainant also added that he was honoured in the celebration of Independence Day and Republic Day by the Minister in Ujjan for his good work. The Complainant alleged that the facts are misleading and baseless and publishing the news item prominently without investigation and proves that paper had conspired to defame him. He requested to take action against the respondent as per rule.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 16.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. Dr. S.K. Jain, the complainant appeared in person. Shri Rajkumar Singh, Advocate appeared for the respondent.

The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and the representative of the respondent newspaper. It has also perused the complaint, the Written Statement, the counter comments and all other connected papers and is of the opinion that the story is motivated. Accordingly, the Inquiry Committee recommends for Censure of the respondent. Held

The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Censure the respondent newspaper. A copy of the order be forwarded to the Director General of DAVP, The Director, Information and Public Relations Department, M.P., the District Magistrate Bhopal and the RNI for appropriate action. PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

SI. No.39 F.No.14/579/16-17-PCI

Complainant Respondent Shri Vijay Trimbak Gokhale, The Editor, Savarkar Road, Dombivli (East)-. Loksatta, Navi Mumbai & The Editor, Thomson Reuters(I) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 12.03.2017 has been filed by Shri Vijay T. Gokhle, Dombivali against the Editor, Loksatta, Navi Mumbai and the Editor, Thomson Reuters(I), Mumbai alleging publication of news item under the caption “ The decision of demonetization thrust/forced by Central Government, Reserve Bank concedes before a Parliamentary Committee” (English Translation) in its issue dated 21.1.2017. The caption of the Reuter news item is “ India pressed ahead with bank note ban despite RBI concerns” It is reported in the impugned news items that Central Government took the decision of demonetization despite RBI repeatedly saying that its circulation would create unprecedented chaos in the country, People will face immense inconvenience. According to the complainant, the caption of the news item in Loksatta newspaper is not accurate and some contents published in the said newspaper are wrong and tend to mislead readers. The complainant submits that in his opinion Loksatta newspaper has taken this news item from “Reuters” news agency as Loksatta newspaper has not published the name of the “Reuters” at the top of the news item but has made reference to Reuters in the news item. However, the source of the news item has been generally given by the Loksatta newspaper as “News organisation”, New Delhi (VruttaSanstha). The complainant sent a mail dated 14.2.2017 to the respondent to publish expression of regrets but has received no response. A Show Cause notice dated 09.05.2017 was issued to the Editor,Loksatta and the Editor, Thomson Reuters to file their reply.

Written Statement from the Editor,Thomson Reuters In response to the Show Cause notice, the respondent vide his letter dated 23.05.2017, has submitted that the complainant objects to an article published by the newspaper, Loksatta. The Reuters had published its article on its website on the same date. He has further submitted that the complainant does not allege any errors, omissions or inaccuracies in the Reuters article. The Reuters article was premised on written testimony submitted to a Parliamentary panel, which provided the RBI ample opportunity to comment prior to publication, and the Reuters article has not been disputed by anyone, including any government officials or the RBI.

Written Statement from the Editor, Loksatta The respondent editor, Loksatta, vide his letter dated 24.06.2017 has submitted that the news appearing in Loksatta, Mumbai edition issued dated 21.1.2017 is not a translation of a Reuters news report. Hence, there is no basis for the correction, clarification, apology or regrets. The news report was based on information received from reliable sources. He has further submitted that contents of the news vary from what is stated in the Reuters report and cannot be restricted to what Reuter’s report says. Further, the newspaper, Loksatta, is not bound to disclose the source from where this information was received. The respondent denied the complainant’s allegations that factually incorrect and misleading information was published in the impugned news item. Counter Comments In response to the written statement of the respondent, Reuters, the complainant vide his letter dated 9.6.2017 has submitted that the thrust of the submission of Thomson Reuters and rightly so, is that his objection pertains to Loksatta article and he has not alleged any errors, omissions or inaccuracies in the Reuters’ article. He has requested the Council to ask Thomson Reuters to seek clarification as to why Loksatta newspaper did not mention the name of “Reuters” at the head of news item and why the source of the news item has been generally given by Loksatta as “News organisation, New Delhi(VaruttaSanstha).

Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 16.08.2017 at Ahmedabad. Neither the complainant nor the respondent has appeared. The complainant has sent an E-mail inter alia requesting for adjournment of the case on the ground that being a senior citizen he is unable to come to Ahmedabad, Gujarat. His prayer is to hold sitting of a Committee at Mumbai to save his time, money and energy, alternatively his prayer is to provide him the Video Conferencing facility for hearing. The Inquiry Committee is not inclined to accede to his prayer. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, the Written Statement filed by the Loksatta and Thomson Reuters and all other connected papers. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that impugned publication are analysis of the issue concerning demonetisation and respondents have not committed breach of journalistic ethics so as to call for action by the Council Under Section 14(1) of the Act. In fact the complainant in his further communication has stated that he had no grievance against the Thomsan Reuters. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint.

Sl. No. 40 F.No.14/586/16-17-PCI

Shri Vijay Trimbak Gokhale, The Editor, Dombivali Loksatta, Mumbai. Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This compliant dated 18.03.2017 has been filed by Shri Vijay Trimbak Gokhale, Dombivali against the Editor, Loksatta, Mumbai alleging publication of a news item in its issue dated 17.1.2017 under the caption “In Modi Regime Vacant Positions “Additional”! From Reserve Bank to Commissions for/of Dalits, Natives, Farmers are in danger of Vacant positions”(English Translation).The news item basically talks about the vacant positions in various commissions and organisations of the Central Government in the current NDA regime. It is reported in the impugned news item that demonetization decision of RBI was taken in hurry as there were ten positions of Independent Directors vacant. It appears that the Board of Director consisting of only government members approved the decision of demonetization. In his comments the complainant submits that he is not against the contents relating to vacant positions in various commissions and organisations, except the statement on various positions in RBI, which is incorrect. He has further submitted that RBI ACT does not anywhere mention of “Independent Director”. The chart given of vacant positions in a news item mentions ten non-government expert Directors positions are vacant whereas there is no such mention of “Expert Director” anywhere in the RBI ACT. The complainant drew the attention of the respondent editor in the matter by sending an email dated 17.1.2017. In response thereto, the respondent filed a reply along attaching therewith answer of Rajya Sabha over vacancy of Directors in RBI. He submitted that his story was essentially based on authentic source of information. However, the respondent has admitted that there is no such thing as “Independent Director” on the Board of Reserve Bank. In order to dismiss the matter, the complainant asked the respondent to publish an explanation in the matter but the same has not been done so far.

No Written Statement A Show Cause notice was issued to the respondent editor Loksatta, Mumbai on 9.5.2017 but not response has been filed. Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 16.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. There was no appearance on behalf of the either side.

The Complainant has sent a mail inter alia requesting for adjournment of the case on the ground that being a senior citizen he is unable to come to Ahmedabad, Gujara. His prayer is to hold sitting of a Committee at Mumbai to save his time, money and energy, alternatively his prayer is to provide him the Video Conferencing facility for hearing. The Inquiry Committee is not inclined to accede to his prayer. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, the Written Statement filed by the Loksatt and all other connected papers. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that, the grievance is only playing around words i.e. designation as Independent Directors vis a vis “Non-Official Directors” and therefore the Inquiry Committee holds that the respondents have not committed any breach of journalistic ethics so as to call for action by the Council u/s 14(1) of the Press Council Act, 1978. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint. Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Dismiss the complaint. Press Council of India

Sl. No. 41 File No. 14/570/16-17-PCI

Shri B.L. Jatav, Vs. The Editor & Publisher, Regional Manager, Chambal Chetna, M.P. Seeds & Farm Development Weekly newspaper, Corporation, Gwalior, M.P. Jabalpur, M.P.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 22.3.2017 has been filed by Shri B.L. Jatav, Regional Manager, M.P. Beej Avam Farm Vikas Nigam, Jabalpur, M.P. against the editor & publisher, Chambal Chetna, Weekly Newspaper, Gwalior, M.P. alleging publication of a series of false, baseless and defamatory news items which are as follows along with the objections of the complainant on the impugned news item:

Sl. Caption Complainant’s objection Date No. of Public ation 1. र◌ा जय ससच ना आयखकत This news item is malicious and 14.11 .2 without any basis, shown him as 016 दवारा बत ज़ ननगिम कन corrupt officer and reported that the अगधि◌ का ररयल कन खखल◌ा फ complainant conspired with the police personnel and employees of the Court ननरथय सन िम चा हड़कवंप to misplace original folder related to one Mr. Karmveer Chauhan. 2. लवंबत फहररसत हचै कनत तय The respondent addressed him 14.11 .2 disrespectfully and maliciously and 016 बनधि◌ क बत ज़ ननगिम जा टव made false allegations against him कन का लन का रन◌ा िम क ककी without any substantial basis. He further stated that the respondent published that at Organic Farm, Khamhariya in order to increase production of crops, sown Urea (fertilizer) has been used, which is baseless. 3. कनत तय बनधि◌ क जा टव नन The respondent again published false 21.11 .2 and incorrect news. The respondent 016 जचैववक कन न◌ा िम न पर maliciously and without any basis ककय ा फजज वा ड़ा , बनधि◌ क published that the complainant has used chemical fertilizers to double the सवंच◌ा लक सन जा वंच कक◌ी िम ◌ा वंग production of paddy at Dindori and that the complainant got 39 quintals of soyabean seeds vanished from the stock. Further, without any basis, the respondent published that the complainant has forged several documents. The respondent has published the news in order to defame the complainant. 4. कनत तय बनधि◌ क जबलपखर The respondent published a false news 28.11 .2 item without any basis that there are 016 जा टव नन एमि◌ णत कन grave irregularities and that the खखल◌ाफ िम कच◌ा थ खक ला , complainant is engaged in corrupt practice. िम ◌ा लवत य ऐविम अगरवा ल णत॰कन॰गखपता भत वववािदक िमव 5. कनत तय बनधि◌ क बत ज ननगिम This news item held the complainant 5. 12.20 guilty of corrupt practices and 16 जा टव नन लग◌ा या बत ज demanded the institution for ननगिम कक कर कड़क क◌ा चसन registering an FIR and removal of the complainant from the post of Regional ◌ा, सकत का यथव◌ा हह कक◌ी िम ◌ा वंग? Manager, Jabalpur. The respondent has published news of such a nature which has dented the reputation of the complainant irreparably. Further, the respondent has repeatedly published defamatory articles against the complainant without any basis and which in fact is utterly false. 6. िम ◌ा िम ला बत ज ननगिम कन In this news item, the respondent again 12. 12. 2 concocted the facts to defamed the 016 कनत तय बनधि◌ क जा टव ककी complainant and made false allegations षट ऐविम अवचैिध कायथ maliciously to instigate the Managing Director to act against the complainant. गखजा ररयल क◌ा ? 7. बत .ऐल.जा टव बत ज ननगिम कन This news is highly defamatory and is 19.12. 2 without any substance. Such news item 016 मि◌ खख रडयवंत का रह ऐविम demonstrates the malicious conduct कस टर गचत िदसत◌ा वनज़ बन ◌ा नन coupled with respondent’s association with several persons who want to मि◌व िम ◌ा दहर ? specifically tarnish the complainant’s image and cause harm to him. 8. कनत तयबनधि◌कबत This news was published in the front 26.12. 2 page with a photograph of the 016 .ऐल.जा टवदवा र◌ा ककएगएघ कटा complainant. The entire news is false लकककी जा वंचकर सखतका यथव◌ा हहककी and neither any other newspaper published such information nor did the ककी िम ◌ा वंग department ever issued any show cause to the complainant or sought any information. The news was published to harass the complainant and may be for some other purpose. 9. बत ज़ ननगिम कन कनत तय The respondent published another 16.1.20 frivolous and derogatory news item 17 बनधि◌ क बत.ऐल.जा टव कन against the complainant in the front षटा च◌ा र कन का रन◌ा िम न page of the newspaper. 10. कनत तय बनधि◌ क बत.ऐल.जा टव The respondent against published this 30.1.2 frivolous and defamatory news item 017 कन षट ऐविम अवचैिध against the complainant. ककय ◌ा कल◌ा पक कक◌ी जा वंच कय क नहहवं

The complainant has submitted that being aggrieved of the frivolous and false publications, he issued a legal notice through his advocate to the respondent on 3.1.2017 but received no response. Rather, the respondent threatened the complainant that he will continue to publish such information. The complainant further submitted that he also informed about these publications to his employer i.e. Managing Director, M.P. Beej and Farm Vikas Nigam vide letter dated 13.1.2017. The complainant has stated that the action of the respondent is against the standards of journalistic ethics. Press should not become a tool to abuse someone and damage ones social reputation without any cause. He has further stated that the act of publishing defamatory material without any basis and research amounts to professional misconduct and it warrants action by the Press Council of India. The complainant further enclosed a Press Release issued by the Council on 1.4.2004 in respect of Censuring the respondent newspaper ‘Chambal Chetna’ for violation of journalistic conduct. The complainant has requested the Council to derecognize the respondent newspaper and further directs for its closure. He has further requested the Council to restrain the respondent newspaper to publish any such false and fabricated information. He has also requested the Council to punish the respondent as per the rules framed by the Council and to direct the respondent to place on record all relevant documents and records relating to his case.

No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent on 19.5.2017 but no written statement has been filed. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 16.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. There was no appearance on behalf of the either side. The complainant is the Regional Manager, M.P. Beej & Farm Vikas Nigam, M.P. and his grievance is that the respondent weekly newspaper had published a false, baseless and defamatory news item on various dates. It is the allegation of the complainant that all these stories are false and intended to take undue advantage from him. He has specifically averred that all these news items were sent to him on his personal mobile through whatsapp a day prior to date of publication so as to obtain undue advantage from the complainant. It also seems that the editor of the newspaper is personally involved in making the story. Despite service of notice the respondent has not chosen to appear, nor has filed the sritten statement. In the absence of any defence/rebuttal filed by respondent, the Inquiry Committee accepts the allegations made by the complainant that the stories published in the newspaper are false and intended to obtain undue advantage. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for Censure of the newspaper.

Held

The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Censure the respondent newspaper. A copy of the order be forwarded to the Director General, DAVP, the Director, Information and Public Relations Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh, the District Magistrate, Gwalior and the RNI for appropriate action. Press Council of India

Sl. No. 42 File No. 14/50/17-18-PCI

Shri Ruplal Sharma, Vs. The Editor, Chanderia, Chittorgarh, Dainik Bhaskar, Rajasthan Bhilwara, Rajasthan

Adjudication Dated 21.6.2017

This complaint dated 8.5.2017 has been filed by Shri Ruplal Sharma, Chanderia, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan against the editor, Dainik Bhaskar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan for publication of false and misleading news item under the caption “जिजस ज़'9न पर पररषद न# द3ब.र न9ल.'9 ननक.ल),उस पर भ9 कब िज.”in its issue dated 6.5.2017.

The impugned news item reported digging work at land twice put out for Government auction having been encroached by the complainant and his brother, a Councillor has been stopped after a complaint. It has been reported that the complainant and his brother got the JCB machine to dig the foundation overnight on the land which was proposed for auction twice. The complainant, while denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news item, has stated that the news item is completely misleading and false. The complainant alleged that the impugned news was published with an intention to defame him and his brother, a Councillor in the society. The complainant has stated that they are the legal owner of the land in question. The complainant has further stated that an investigation in the matter was conducted by the Commissioner, Udaipur, the District Magistrate, Chittorgarh, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chittorgarh, the Secretary, U.I.T., Chittorgarh, City Council, Chirrorgarh, Tehesildar, Chittrogarh and D.L.B., Jaipur and according to their report, he (the complainant) is not involved in the illegal encroachment of land having arazi no. 111. The complainant drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news item on 8.5.2017 and requested him to publish the contradiction but in vain. The complainant has requested the Council to take necessary action against the respondent. No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent on 7.7.2017 but no written statement has been filed. Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 16.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. Shri Rooplal Sharma, the complainant alongwith Shri Narendra Singh Bhati appeared. There was no appearance on behalf of the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant. Despite service of notice nobody has chosen to appear on behalf of the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and other connected papers. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that the complainant should be allowed to furnish his version to the respondent newspaper as the respondent to publish the same without unnecessary delay. Accordingly, the Inquiry Committee directs the complainant to give his version to the respondent within four weeks. The respondent newspaper shall publish the version of the complainant, after necessary editing, within four weeks from the date of its filing by the complainant. The Inquiry Committee accordingly, recommends for disposal of the complaint. Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Dispose of the complaint with aforesaid direction. Press Council of India

Sl. No. 43 File No.14/578/16-17-PCI.

Shri Ajay M. Marathe, The Editor, Vashi, Navi Mumbai Indian Express, Mumbai

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 3.3.2017 has been filed by Shri Ajay M. Marathe, Vashi, Navi Mumbai against the editor, Indian Express for publication of a news item under the caption “Institutional Identity of RBI has been damaged : Former Governor Reddy ” in its issue dated 10.1.2017.

It is reported in the impugned news item that former Reserve Bank Governor, Shri YV Reddy in an interview to CNBC-TV18 channel said “the role of the Central bank in our economy is under threat and it is a national problem which has to be addressed as national problem. My own suspicion is that the institutional identity of the RBI has been damaged. The central bank is facing a reputational risk and the problem of black money cannot be eliminated through demonetization alone”.

According to the complainant the respondent deliberately omitted the following words of Shri Reddy “My own suspicion is that the Institutional… and this gives a totally different pictures to a person who just goes through the headline, which is unfair to Shri Reddy also. The complainant further submitted that the caption of impugned news does not match at all with the news contents, which is a professional misconduct. The complainant vide letter dated 10.2.2017 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned news item, but received no response. He requested the Council to take action against the ENS Economic Bureau & the Editor.

A Show Cause Notice issued to the respondent editor, ‘Indian Express’, Mumbai on 11.5.2017.

Written Statement

In response, the respondent vide written statement dated 22.5.2017 while denying the allegations submitted that the news report was carried in good faith, public interest and without malice to anyone. The news report covers an interview given by Mr. YV Reddy, former Governor of the Reserve Bank of India to CNBC-TV who has discussed inter alia the role of Central bank in our economy is under threat and it is national problem which has to be addressed as a national problem. Further, the allegation that the title of the report purportedly gives a totally different picture to a person who just goes through the headline is also wrong as the headline clearly attribute the quote to Mr. Reddy. Even till date the newspaper has not received any complaint whatsoever from Mr. Reddy alleging any misquote or inaccuracy. Hence, there is no locus, substance and merit in the complaint. Counter comments

In response, the complainant vide letter dated 19.7.2017 submitted that in the interview to CNBC-TV, when Shri Reddy says “My suspicion is that”, there is an element of uncertainty about the thing, news item, but when it is replaced by a quote “Institutional Identity of RBI has been damaged: Former Governor Reddy”, here is the certainty in reader’s mind that Shri Reddy is certain and made up his mind that Institutional Identity of RBI has indeed been damaged. He has further submitted that the reply is not even signed by the Editor, Indian Express and no authority letter issued & attached by the Editor. He has requested the Council to take strict action against the respondent Editor.

Response of the Respondent

The respondent vide his further letter dated 2.8.2017 has submitted that the complainant has objected to the signing of his reply/written statement. The complainant has objected to a quotation of the former RBI Governor, Shri YV Reddy. He informed that a reader reads the headline and the accompanying news report or article and would understand the gist of what Shri Reddy was expressing. The complainant has not dealt with the detailed reply/written statement especially with reference what appeared in other newspapers and websites. He has stated that the complaint is without merit and the allegations made by the complaint and his counter comments are denied.

Report of the Inquiry Committee

The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 17.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. There was no appearance from either side.

Despite service of notice the complainant has not chosen to appear. He has informed that due to health issues he is unable to come and requested to consider the Written Statement in matter. The respondent has filed the Written Statement but nobody is present on its behalf before the Inquiry Committee. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint, the Written Statement, the Counter Comments and all other connected papers and is of the opinion that the respondent newspaper, while publishing the impugned news item, has not committed any breach of journalistic ethics so as to call for an action by the Council. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint.

Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Dismiss the complaint. Press Council of India

SI. No. 44 File No. 14/501/16-17-PCI

Shri Jayant AnandaroBalugade, Vs. Shri VasantraoKrishnajiDattawade, Advocate, Owner/Printer/Editor/Publisher, Ichalkaranji, Kolhapur (M.S) Daily Mahasatta, Tarun Arts & Press, Kolhapur (M.S.)

Shri Dilawar P. Momin, Major Advertising Representative, DainkMahasatta, Kolhapur (M.S.)

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 19.1.2017 has been filed by Shri Jayant AnandaroBalugade, Advocate, Ichalkaranji, Kolhapur (M.S) against Shri VasantraoKrishnajiDattawade, Owner/Printer/Editor/Publisher and Shri Dilawar P. Momin, Major Advertising Representative, DainkMahasatta, Kolhapur (M.S.) for publication of a false and misleading news item with malafide intention under the caption “Against Deelip Mutha, Ashok Patanee shall file Writ-Petition in High Court” and “My Victory is confirmed” (English translation as provided by the complainant) in its issue dated 23.11.2016 and 22.11.2016 respectively. It is reported in the first impugned news item dated 23.11.2016 that Mr. Ashok Patnee is going to file nomination as contesting candidate of Rashtrya Samajwadi Party against BJP candidate, Shri Deelip Mutha in 13B region. It has been further reported that Shri Deelip Mutha submitted his candidature application with affidavit that no criminal case is pending against him in any Court of Law but a criminal case no. 287/2009 u/s 467/468/34 IPC is pending against him before Ichalkaranji J.M.F.C. Court, Ichalkaranji. It has been also reported that Shri Ashok Patnee is going to file a Writ Petition in Mumbai High Court regarding the decision of the Returning Officer of relevant region of Ichalkaranji Municipal Council for giving Shri Deelip Mutha clean chit despite a case is pending against him. It is reported in the second impugned news item dated 22.11.2016 that the BJP candidate from Ichalkaranji confirms his victory and stated that the earlier Counsellor had done nothing in these area and public support with him. He has also stated that the opposition misguided the general public by placing false allegation that a case is pending against him but no case is pending in any court of law. The complainant submitted that the respondent in connivance with Shri Deelip Mutha published false and misleading news items to misguide the general public for forthcoming general elections. The complainant vide Notice dated 24.11.2016 explained the fact of criminal case and requested the respondent to publish the same but the respondent refused to accept the Notice. The complainant has requested the Council to take necessary action against the respondent. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent on 1.3.2017. Written Statement The respondent in his written statement dated 21.3.2017 has stated that the whole complaint is false and vexatious and the complaint is not supported by any type of affidavit. He has further stated that the complainant is an advocate by profession and not a social worker. On the contrary, the complainant is an accused in two different criminal matters before the JMFC Court Ichalkaranji and hence his contention regarding social work is incorrect. He alleged that the complainant has filed this complaint with oblique motive. He has submitted that it is not binding on any newspaper to publish each and every news regarding any criminal matter. Further, if any Court of law pronounced Judgment or order, it is not binding to any Newspaper to publish it. He has further submitted that the concerned person, Deelip Mutha has given his memorandum and has denied pendency of any criminal matter against him. So in the whole matter, they strictly complied the rules and regulations of the newspaper. He has submitted that the newspaper has published the view of both the parties regarding the subject matter. He has requested the Council to dismiss the complaint being fake and false. A copy of the written statement was forwarded to the complainant on 18.4.2017 for counter comments. Counter Comments The complainant in his counter comments dated 1.7.2017 has stated that the written statement submitted by the respondent is false, frivolous and evasive of complaint and has no merits. He alleged that the respondent has committed offence under Press Council Act knowingly to protect false news regarding municipal elections candidate, Deelip Mutha. A copy of the counter comments was forwarded to the respondent on 14.7.2017 for information. Communication from the complainant This communication dated 17.8.2017 received at the time of hearing of Inquiry Committee meeting held on 17.8.2017 at Ahmedabad from Shri Balmukund Dattatraya Vhanungare, who appeared on behalf of the complainant, submitted that the news published in the newspaper is a paid news and the respondents have denied to publish factual news and thereby committed an offence under Press Council Act, 1978. He has further submitted that the respondent has never denied the factual contents of the complaint and pretended to escape from clauses of the Act. He has requested the Council to take strict action against the respondent editor. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came for hearing before Inquiry Committee held on 17.08.2017 at Ahmedabad. Shri Balmukund Dattatraya Vhanungare, L.I.C. Agent, appeared for the complainant and Shri Dilawar P. Momin, Manager, and Shri Mehboob Banadar, Advocate, appeared for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the complainant and the representative of the respondent and has perused the complaint, the Written Statement and the counter comments. The Inquiry Committee finds no substance in the grievance of the complainant. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for Disposal of the complaint. Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dispose of the complaint. PRESS COUNCIL OF INDIA

Sl. No. 45 F.No.14/376/16-17-PCI

Shri Vakiluddin Zahiruddin Ansari, The Editor, J.K. Bakery The National Crime News, Ahmadabad Gandhinagar, Gujarat.

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 22.10.2016 has been filed by Shri Vakiluddin Zahiruddin Ansari, J&K Bakery, Gujarat against the Editor, The National Crime News allegedly for issing a legal notice dated 13.10.2016 for explanation. It has been stated in the legal notice issued to the complainant by the respondent that the complainant, Shri Vakiluddin Zahiruddin Ansari has not been selling the bakery item as per Food Safety & Standard Authority of India (FSSAI) rules and regulation. Further the complainant has been asked about lisence of the said product and to place it along with relevant documents before the respondent editor within seven days, failing which the respondent would lodge a complaint before the Food & Drugs Department Authority and also the same would be published in newspapers. The complainant in his counter comments submitted that the National Crime News has no authority to check or examine our lisense which shows that the aforesaid newspaper is blackmailing us and the said notice was issued to extract money. He further requested the Council to take strict action against the respondent editor.

A Show Cause notice was issued to the respondent editor “The National Crime News’ on 20.04.2017 but not response has been received. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 17.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. Shri Vakiluddin Zahiruddin Ansari, the complainant along with Shri Dharmendra K. Jain, representative appeared for the complainant and Shri Janak Rajendra Bhai Patel, respondent Editor appeared before the Inquiry Committee. The respondent editor has filed an undertaking inter alia stating that in future he will not issue such notices. Let it be taken on record. In view of the aforesaid undertaking given by the respondent editor, the Inquiry Committee is not inclined to proceed in the matter any further. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for disposal of the complaint. Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons findings and adopts the report of the Committee and decides to Dispose of the complaint in wake of undertaking given by the respondent editor. Sl. No. 46 File No. 14/571/16-17-PCI

Shri Swami A.D. Tirth, Vs. The Editor, Central Prison, Mumbai Mirror, Navi Mumbai Times of India building, Mumbai

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 20.3.2017 has been filed by Shri Swami A.D. Tirth, Mumbai against the editor, Mumbai Mirror, Mumbai for publication of false and defamatory news item in its issue dated 18.3.2017 under the caption “2008 Malegaon blasts accused wants ‘some respect’. How about adding Shri before my name?” It is reported in the impugned news item that self proclaimed religious leader Dayanand Pandey, an accused in the 2008 Malegaon blasts that killed six people, has filed an application before the Special MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act) Court stating the honorific ‘Shri’ be added before his name in all documents including the Court records and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) case papers. It is further reported in the impugned news item that Pandey said in his application that the trial hadn’t even started and he was innocent until proven guilty and has every right to ensure his self respect. The news report states that Special Public Prosecutor, Shri AvinashRasal opposed Pandey’s application on the grounds that usual practice was followed by the NIA and that there was no violation of law while refraining from using honorific’s before accuse name.

The complainant states that he is holding surname religious post of majority as Srimad Jagatguru Shankaracharya Nishkalamanya, Shri Sarvagnya Sharda Peeth and at present lodged at Central Prison, Taloja, Navi Mumbai in connection with Malegaon blast case 2008, in which no charges have been framed by the Court till date and likely to be discharge him with this case. The complainant has submitted that he has sent all the details to the respondent vide letter dated 21.3.2017 with a request to add Shri with anyone’s name and use proper language in respect of news regarding him otherwise he will take proper legal action as per law. He has also requested the respondent to publish his letter but in vain. He has requested the Council to take necessary action against the respondent. Written Statement of the Editor, Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd The respondent vide his Written Statement dated 9.8.2017 has denied each and every allegation made in the complaint regarding the said news article. He has further denied that the said news article is defamatory, false and baseless as alleged and is factually correct, carried in good faith and in public interest. All the statements and findings published in the said report have been part of the court proceedings and recordings and the national investigation Agency (NIA) case papers which are matters of public information and records. He has further submitted that the intention of the news article for referring him as the Malegaon blasts accused was to make a reference of his background, which the general public has the right to know as a part of their right to information and they are mere intermediaries in this due process of law. The news did not purport to reflect that he has no respect in the society. The objective was to disseminate information. In the light of this, he has requested to put the complainant to strict proof thereof. He has further stated that as per a circular dated 8th March, 2017 by Hon’ble Shri Justice G.S. Patel of the High Court of Bombay, it was observed that it is not necessary to add pre-fixes to names in case of legal proceedings because if these incorrect descriptions are not carried forward into orders, then issuance of certified copies becomes difficult. This makes it clear that it is not necessary to add pre-fixes ahead of names. In fact this same circular was cited while rejecting the complainant’s application before the special NIA court hearing the case. He has stated that complaint made by the complainant is uncalled for and is a result of misinterpreting the facts of said news article in professional misconduct on our part, we only showcased our facts as they were. He has requested the Council to discharge the paper by dismissing present proceedings u/s 14 and 15 of the Press Council Act, 1978. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 17.08.2017 at Ahmadabad. No one appeared on behalf of the complainant as well as respondent. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and all other connected papers and finds no substance in the grievance of the complaint. The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for dismissal of the complaint. Held The Press Council on consideration of records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts reasons, findings and adopts the report of the Committee and Dismisses the complaint. Press Council of India Sl. No. 47 File No. 14/40-43/17-18-PCI

Dr. Vinod Kumar Jain, Vs 1. The Editor-in-Chief, Sikar, Rajasthan Dainik Bhaskar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat

Through his Advocate Shri Kinshuk Jain, 2. The Editor, Jaipur, Rajasthan Dainik Bhaskar, Jaipur, Rajasthan

3. The Editor, Shekhawati Bhaskar, Sikar, Rajasthan

4. The Concerned Correspondent Dainik Bhaskar, Sikar, Rajasthan

Adjudication Dated 21.9.2017

This complaint dated 20.4.2017 has been filed by Dr. Vinod Kumar, Sikar, Rajasthan through his advocate Shri Kinshuk Jain, Jaipur, Rajasthan against Dainik Bhaskar, Ahmedabad, Jaipur and Sikar editions alleging publication of a false, frivolous and vexatious news item under the caption “लक'9 '.कर ट जसथि◌ 1 िजजैन फ.'./ व मसट) फ.'./ स# सपल ल#कर िज.जांच क# मलए भ#िज# औषधिध ननयजां क ववभ.ग न#बबन . िज र) स.लट ड.ल# 10 पए 'म बन 9 दव. 360 पए 'म बबक रह), ट)' न# 3 हज़.र स# जय .द. ट#बल#ट फीज़ की ” with sub-heading “कन॰ एमि◌ ॰ िम निम कररयल जचैन व मिम तल हह◌ॉ जसपटल सन सटवट कन बबल व इल◌ा ज खचथ कन िदसत◌ा वनज़ भत जब त ककए”in its issue dated 3.3.2017.

It is reported in the impugned news item that a gang is operating in Sikar who deals in counterfeit medicines and in whole district, counterfeit medicines worth Rs. Nine crores rupees are available. It is further reported that the Drug Controller conducted raids on medical shop and has freezed 3000 tablets worth lakhs of rupees. It is also reported that when drug control team conducted raids on chemist shop, no pharmacists were available in the store and bills were also not ready.The drug control team during the raid, seized several documents, tablets and bills from K.M. Memorial Jain & Mittal Hospital. Denying the allegations levelled in the impugned news article, the complainant submitted that the news article is false, frivolous and vexatious published with a view to defame his hospital’s by mentioning the name of the hospital and using derogatory words like ‘छा पा ’ etc. The complainant submitted that there was no raid as reported by the respondent and falsely mentioned that there was no pharmacist present at the drugs store during raid while the correct fact is that no medicine is sold without bills and there has been no seizure of documents from the hospital. The complainant further submitted that there was no enquiry regarding the stents as mentioned falsely by the respondent in the impugned article. According to the complainant, the impugned article is not only a glaring case of incorrect reporting, the same has also been published with a malafide intent, which has caused embarrassment to him and family members. There was a routine visit and inspection by the medical team to the hospital and no irregularities were found. The complainant vide letter dated 20.4.2017 drew the attention of the respondent towards the impugned article and requested him to tender unconditional apology by immediately withdrawing all the allegations and aspersions made by the respondent against him but in vain. No Written Statement A Show Cause Notice was issued only to the respondent editor, Shekhawati Bhaskar, Sikar, Rajasthan. No written statement has been filed. Report of the Inquiry Committee The matter came up for hearing before the Inquiry Committee on 17.8.2017 at Ahmedabad. Shri Kinshuk Jain. Advocate appeared for the complainant. Shri Raj Kumar Singh, Advocate appeared for the respondent. The Inquiry Committee has heard the Counsel for the complainant and the representative of the respondent. It is the assertion of the complainant that immediately after publication of the impugned news item, he wrote to the editor for giving his views and asking for publication of the clarification but the same has not been done. The Inquiry Committee has perused the complaint and all other connected papers. The Inquiry Committee is of the opinion that if the complainant had sent a communication for the publication of the clarification, the respondent newspaper, after necessary editing, shall publish the same with the same prominence in his newspaper.

The Inquiry Committee, accordingly, recommends for disposal of the complaint with the aforesaid direction.