In a significant order protecting press freedom, the Allahabad High Court quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against India Today Editor-in-Chief Aroon Purie and senior journalist Prabhu Chawla. The case arose from a 2004 complaint alleging that their magazine article, "Girls for Sale" (Ladkiyon Ki Mandi), promoted enmity between communities under Sections 153 and 153A of the Indian Penal Code.
Justice Brij Raj Singh observed that the story was intended to expose the human trafficking menace, not to incite hatred or communal disharmony.
Background
The complaint, filed by one Ehtisham Mirza in Lucknow, accused the journalists of publishing material that "hurt sentiments" and caused unrest among certain groups. The article-carried in both Hindi and English editions of India Today on October 13, 2003-investigated the trafficking of minor girls for sexual exploitation across India.
The complainant claimed the report defamed certain communities and portrayed them in poor light. Following statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC, a Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI) took cognizance and issued summons against the journalists in 2007.
Both editors approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash the summoning order and the pending proceedings.
Court's Observations
After examining the magazine excerpts and the legal provisions, Justice Brij Raj Singh ruled that no ingredients of Sections 153 or 153A IPC were made out.
"The article merely highlights a social evil-child trafficking and sexual exploitation of poor girls-based on sources including social worker Dr. Sunitha Krishnan of Hyderabad," the bench observed. "It does not attempt to provoke any community or promote hatred between groups."
The Court emphasized that mere discomfort or unrest within a community cannot automatically be treated as "promotion of enmity." Referring to the Supreme Court’s rulings in Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State of Maharashtra (2007) and Javed Ahmad Hajam v. State of Maharashtra (2024), the judge reiterated that intention (mens rea) is the key element under Section 153A.
"The intention to cause disorder or incite people to violence is the sine qua non of this offence," Justice Singh said, echoing the Supreme Court’s guidance that writings must be read as a whole rather than cherry-picking isolated phrases.
The bench further observed that the India Today feature’s intent was journalistic and investigative-meant to alert authorities and the public about an alarming reality.
"The source of information was credible, the purpose was to create awareness, not hatred," the Court remarked.
Decision
Concluding that the lower court had issued summons "in a mechanical manner," the Allahabad High Court quashed both the summoning order dated 7 May 2007 and the criminal proceedings in Complaint Case No. 626 of 2004 pending before the Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI), Lucknow.
The ruling reaffirmed that journalists reporting on sensitive social issues cannot be criminally prosecuted unless there is clear evidence of malice or intent to inflame communal passions.
"The article reflects a concern for victims of human trafficking, not hostility between communities," the Court held, granting relief to both Prabhu Chawla and Aroon Purie.
Case Title:- Prabhu Chawla vs. State of U.P. and another and a connected matter
