Article 14 of the Indian constitution states that: “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.” However, the Supreme Court (SC) of India granted bail to Arnab Goswami, an anchor and Editor-in-Chief of Republic TV, a media group perceived to be supportive of the ruling party, much sooner than it was expected and thought to be, but remained tight lipped for other journalists. No time was lost. Goswami was arrested by the Mumbai Police on November 4, 2020 on a charge of abetting the suicide of a 53-year-old interior designer Anvay Naik and his mother. As per the FIR, Goswami had not paid his dues amounting to Rs 5.40 crore to Naik’s company, whch had provided the services. The accused was sent to judicial, not police, custody. He moved an unusual writ petition of habeas corpus before the Bombay High Court. The High Court heard his case for five hours on a holiday, and said exactly this on November 9. Goswami did file such a petition. Strangely, he also moved the Supreme Court, wherein his case was listed on November 11. It took the whole day, and that evening he was set free, and emerged from jail raising his hands in the air, much like a celebratory public hero. The role of the judiciary in deciding the case of Arnab on an urgent basis raised questions about the equality of law for all, as enumerated in the holy constitution of this democratic nation. The marathon hearing of his (Goswami) case in the High court and then in Supreme Court, despite pendency of a huge number of much important and grave cases, shows that powerful and influenced people are privileged and probably above the law. If we remember, the same treatment was given to bollywood star Salman Khan. Anyways, it is understood that media persons are powerful in the country like India, but what is more raucous is that the judiciary is still oblivious to the journalists who had been booked by the current dispensation only because they were executing their duties. Before further discussing the various aspects of the role of judiciary, let us first have a look at the chronology of an alleged criminal case registered against Arnab Goswami and three others in 2018 for abetment of suicide committed by an architect Anvay Naik and his mother, Kumud Naik on 5th May 2018, following non-payment of Rs 5.40 crore by Arnab’s TV company for interior decoration work provided at the republic TV studio and Arnab’s office. It was Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) government in Maharashtra at that time. The case was closed on the ground that it was not supported by enough evidence to pursue the case. The case was reopened following a representation for justice made by Anvay Naik’s wife Akshata and his daughter Adnya Naik to the Home Minister of Maharashtra. Now Maharashtra has an alliance government, led by Shiv Sena and Congress (Sonia Gandhi) and National Congress (NC). Coming back to his bail petition in SC, while granting interim bail within a day to Arnab Goswami, Supreme Court Justice DY Chandrachud described the responsibility of the apex court and said, “Forget Arnab Goswami for a moment, we are a constitutional court… If we as a constitutional court do not lay down law and protect personal liberty, then who will?” The High Court heard his case for five hours on a holiday, and said exactly this on November 9. Mr. Goswami did file such a petition. Strangely, he also moved the Supreme Court. The Court spent full day judicial working time on hearing his case, and that in the evening he was set free. Two whole days of judicial time of top constitutional courts (SC/HC) had been spent in deciding whether this one man should get bail or not, when his case for precisely this relief was coming before the sessions judge the very next day. As regards the release itself, suffice it to say that once a court thinks there is no tenable case for continued detention, no man should be held imprisoned. It is being felt that Arnab has been granted preference over hundreds of detention cases, who were waiting to get a chance of hearing. In Uttar Pradesh journalists Siddique Kappan, the journalist from Kerala and two others were detained on their way to Hathras in October 2020. They were detained at Mathura. They were proceeding to the village of 19-year-old Dalit girl, who was allegedly raped and murdered. They had been detained on trump-up charges of sedition, or other similar nature of charges. Same is the case in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) where half a dozen journalists and hundreds of political activists of various democratic parties, are languishing in various jails since the nullification of Article 370 on 5th August 2019. Over hundred hebas corpse pattitions are pending for over 16 months in the Jammu and Kashmir High court waiting for the day to be heard by the honourable court. Many columnists have made fervent appeals to India’s superior court to provide the grace of early hearing to Varavara Rao, poet, aged 80, suffering from neurological and urological health issues. To Sudha Bharadwaj, aged 59, civil liberties defender, suffering hypertension, heart disease, diabetes. Many of them are languishing in various jails since 2018. There are voices in support of Stan Swamy, activist, aged 83, suffering abdominal pain and had multiple falls in jail; he is unable to hold a glass because of Parkinson’s disease, his plea for a small facility asked for an old sick person to use a sipper/straw in jail has also been adjourned by three weeks to November 26. This facility is needed as he is unable to hold a glass/plate or tea cup in his hands. The plea is that let their cases too be posted on an urgent basis, looking at the poor health conditions of detainees before the same Bench — which so instantly gave relief of personal liberty to Arnab Goswami — and let them be judged according to law. Majority among the journalist community and a large number of political leaders feel in India that the type of journalism Arnab Goswami indulges in does not come under the definition of journalism. More or less it has been characterized as a public relation job of the ruling party-BJP. He appears to be acting as spokesperson of the BJP government. That is why the day he was arrested a stream of BJP ministers including the country’s Home Minister Amit Shah demanded his release and cried for freedom of press. Although they did not speak for freedom and liberty of all those detained in other BJP ruled states. None of the BJP’s shouting brigade has ever uttered a single word of sympathy for other intellectuals, journalists and political leaders/activists languishing in various jails all over the country. Decorated retired DGP Julio Ribeiro, who is from Maharashtra lives in Mumbai has said in his column (The Tribune) that Goswami can hardly be called a journalist. Before I competed in the Civil Services examinations, I worked for two years as a Sub-Editor in the National Standard, now renamed The Indian Express. My immediate superior was Sharada Prasad, who later became press adviser to the then PM Indira Gandhi. The first lesson I learnt from him was that the core responsibility of a true journalist was to keep the government of the day in check, lest it abuse the vast power it enjoys. Goswami does not fit into this definition. He is just a paid spokesman for the government. Please note that Goswami has not been arrested for his comments against Sonia Gandhi or Aaditya Thackeray. He’s not being arrested for anything he said on his channel about the Palghar incident of the murder of sadhus, which he needlessly tried to communalise. He’s not been arrested for his ‘witch-hunt’ against Bollywood actors. If he was arrested for any of these, you could have said it’s an assault on free speech. He’s been arrested for alleged abetment of suicide. Certainly, the freedom of the press must be defended strongly by journalists, citizens and anyone who cares about a fair democracy. That must come from principled commitment to the profession, not the impulse for self-protection. Is Goswami a journalist at all, or is he a partisan provocateur, engaged in slanging matches with those who oppose his patrons, using his platform for a narrow political purpose? Of course, even as a citizen Arnab is entitled to civil liberties and protection from state arbitrariness. But those lines have also been blurred for many citizens in the crosshairs of the state, targeted by the instrumental use of the NIA, CBI, ED and police, sometimes Arnab egging them on. Also, over two dozen petitions seeking reversion of nullification of Article 370 are also pending before the Supreme Court for over 18 months. If the SC continues to keep silence for a long period over cases of individual freedom and human rights and some other cases, it is feared that one may attract the notion that it has abandoned its role of judicial review over acts of government, reducing itself to an arbiter of private disputes? The writer is a senior journalist and Indo-Pak peace activist. 2Shares