Journalists’ bail plea rejected in second case

Noida: A fast-track court on Wednesday rejected the bail plea by three staffers of a Noida-based TV news channel — who were arrested by Noida Police for airing a show that was deemed defamatory to chief minister Yogi Adityanath — in the second case against them, a day after a sessions court had granted them bail in the first case.
The arguments raised by the trio during their hearing in the second case, which pertains to cheating and forgery, were “subject to investigation”. Without commenting on the nature of the case, the court of Ved Prakash Verma, ADJ (fast-track court), said sufficient grounds for bail were not there.
The lawyer of Ishika Singh, owner of BR Media Services Private Limited, contended that Bharat Hydel Projects Private Limited (owner of TV channel Network 10, also known as Nation Live) had a content-sharing agreement with her firm, signed on February 14 this year. K K Singh, the lawyer, argued that his client had been framed, that her firm had a valid content-sharing agreement with owners of Network 10, as well as a “time slot” for running content on the channel, whose logo was retained. K K Singh told TOI they will now move Allahabad high court for bail.
Advocate Nitin Gupta, representing the other arrested Nation Live staffers, editor Anuj Shukla and achor Anshul Kaushik, contended they were “mere employees of the channel”, who had joined a few months ago and had nothing to do with the channel’s ownership pattern. Gupta told TOI, “Anuj joined the channel only two months ago and had not prepared or signed any document related to the channel. For any work done by the channel, its owners/directors are responsible. Both Anuj and Anshul were merely employees.” He too said they will now move the high court for bail.
The court said “it was unclear as to which administrative official had granted authority to BR Media to work for Network 10 on rent”. The court order on Anuj’s bail plea reads: “Investigation is on in the issue. The case diary also mentions fraud with some channel employees and issuance of cheques, which bounced due to lack of funds. So far, the memorandum of association and memorandum of article have not been included in the investigation.”
On Tuesday, the court of additional district and sessions judge V Nalin Kant Tyagi had ordered that the bail pleas of the trio in the defamation case be accepted and they be granted bail after submission of two sureties of Rs. 40,000 each.
Noting that the sections 153 and 505 (1), 505 (2) are scrutinable by a magistrate and sections 153 and 501 are bailable offences, the court had said that the discussion does not seem to cause enmity, hatred and disaffection in the society.
The arguments in the second FIR were heard on Wednesday in the court of ADJ (fast track court) Ved Prakash Verma and a copy of the order was issued late Wednesday night.
The second FIR states that the inquiry by the assistant director, district information department Meena Biswas found that the “channel had no license or permission from a designated officer for running the channel.”