NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today issued notice to the Union of India, Jindal Steel and Power Ltd. and the Delhi Government on a petition by Zee News Limited (ZNL) praying for quashing of three FIRs, including the alleged extortion case, against the group and its editors.

A bench, headed by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir, asked for the response within four weeks.

The bench issued notice to them on another Zee Group plea which questioned the Centre?s showcause notice issued to it for airing a programme in which the news channel revealed the identity of the male friend and eye witness of the gangrape case on 16 December. The Centre had asked Zee to explain why its licence should not be terminated.

The Zee petition, which has been listed after four weeks, also seeks a stay of an Information and Broadcasting Ministry notice/communication of 31 January "to protect the Petitioners from unconstitutional state action violative of the Fundamental Right of the Petitioners under Article 19(1)(a)".

Earlier last month, the Delhi Court had taken cognizance of a defamation complaint against Congress MP Naveen Jindal and others and asked the Delhi Police to probe the role of Jindal and 16 other officials of his firm Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) who are named in the complaint filed by Zee News Editor Sudhir Chaudhary.

Metropolitan Magistrate Jay Thareja asked the Station House Officer of the Tughlak Road in south Delhi to seize the minutes of meetings and other documents of Broadcast Editors Association (BEA) regarding termination of the membership of Chaudhary.

The Police had been asked to give a report within a month and the case listed for further hearing on 15 February.

Chaudhary had alleged that "false allegations" were leveled against him to tarnish his image.

"Keeping in view the fact that 15 out of 17 accused are residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of this court - PS Tuglak Road - and the law laid down in section 202 of the CrPC, it is directed that SHO, PS Tuglak Road (or his deputy) shall conduct an investigation qua the allegations made in the complaint," the court said.

It also said the SHO would investigate the role of each of the respondents relating to the two cause of actions described in the complaint.

Chaudhary, who filed his complaint through Zee News Ltd. counsel Vijay Aggarwal, had earlier said Jindal and JSPL officials had made "deliberately false" statements and registered a "false case" against him in the alleged Rs one billion extortion bid case and defamed him by leveling allegations against him at a press conference here.

?The Crime Branch of Delhi Police was doing one-sided investigation,? said Aggarwal. "Here on, the investigation will be under direction of the court and seizure of documents too,? he added, saying ?now truth will come out.?

NEW DELHI: A Delhi Court has said that steel magnate Naveen Jindal?s alleged call to News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) chairman Justice J S Verma does not amount to an offence of criminal misconduct within the meaning of Section 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

In the case filed by Zee News Ltd seeking intervention of the Central Bureau of Investigation against Jindal for invoking Justice Verma, Special CBI Judge Dharmesh Sharma said: ?At this stage, assuming for the sake of convenience that such act was indeed committed by accused no. 1 (Jindal), it could only be said to be in the realm of moral turpitude or unethical conduct that by no stretch of legal latitude could be said to constitute an offence of criminal misconduct within the meaning of Section 13 (1) (d) of the P. C. Act.?

?Again assuming for the sake of convenience the fact attributed to the accused (Jindal) could only be perceived as having been done by him in his capacity as a CEO of a private company to show his might upon a non-governmental organization (NBSA) that cannot constitute an offence within the meaning of Section 13 (1) (d) of the P. C. Act.?

Zee News counsel Vijay Aggarwal, however, said he would pursue the matter in the Delhi High Court: ?The court has expressed doubts whether calling NBSA, in view of it being a private body, is unethical, criminal or not. Also, in view of the investigation being ordered, it may bring disrepute to NBSA and might affect pendency of civil suit defamation before the High Court of Mumbai.?

On 14 January, the court had taken consideration in the complaint made by Zee News before CBI against Jindal. The case was filed after the CBI did not take action on a complaint made against Jindal after his reported call to Justice Verma before he could make a pronouncement based on Jindal?s complaint against Zee News. While dismissing Jindal?s case, Justice Verma had taken umbrage to the complainant?s conduct.

Zee News Editors Sudhir Chaudhary and Samir Ahluwalia have alleged that they have been falsely implicated in a case relating to a series of exposes in the Coalgate scam involving Congress MP and industrialist Jindal. The two Zee editors wanted to expose Jindal?s template of silencing media coverage of Coalgate through a Rs One billion advertisement contract.

NEW DELHI: Taking cognizance of a defamation complaint against Congress MP Naveen Jindal and others, a Delhi court today asked the Delhi Police to probe the role of Jindal and 16 other officials of his firm Jindal Steel and Power Ltd (JSPL) who are named in the complaint filed by Chaudhary.

Metropolitan Magistrate Jay Thareja asked the Station House Officer of the Tughlak Road in south Delhi to seize the minutes of meetings and other documents of Broadcast Editors Association (BEA) regarding termination of the membership of Zee News Editor Sudhir Chaudhary.

The Police have been asked to give a report within a month and the case has been listed for further hearing on 15 February.

Chaudhary had alleged that "false allegations" were leveled against him to tarnish his image.

"Keeping in view the fact that 15 out of 17 accused are residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of this court - PS Tuglak Road - and the law laid down in section 202 of the CrPC, it is directed that SHO, PS Tuglak Road (or his deputy) shall conduct an investigation qua the allegations made in the complaint," the court said.

It also said the SHO would investigate the role of each of the respondents relating to the two cause of actions described in the complaint.

Chaudhary, who filed his complaint through Zee News Ltd. counsel Vijay Aggarwal, had earlier said Jindal and JSPL officials had made "deliberately false" statements and registered a "false case" against him in the alleged Rs One billion extortion bid case and defamed him by leveling allegations against him at a press conference here.

?The Crime Branch of Delhi Police was doing one-sided investigation,? said Vijay Aggarwal. "Here on, the investigation will be under direction of the court and seizure of documents too,? he added, saying ?now truth will come out.?

The court, in its order, directed the police to "seize the relevant pages of the minute book of JSPL covering the decisions of the management of JSPL referred in the letter dated 18 November 2012 issued by the Company Secretary of JSPL."

It also asked the police to seize the video recording of the press conference "allegedly held on 25 October 2012" by Jindal and others either from their office or from any TV news channel.

The magistrate also clarified that his order "shall not restrict the SHO, PS Tuglak Road, from conducting a full and through investigation" in the matter.

Chaudhary had earlier told the court that "in September 2012, a false case was registered against me at the behest of the respondents (Jindal and others) and they defamed me at different steps for which I have filed the present complaint."

In his statement, Chaudhary had said Jindal, along with others, had claimed in the press conference that BEA had removed him from the post of treasurer after considering his statement whereas he has never attended any such meeting.

Editor Samir Ahluwalia had also filed a separate criminal defamation complaint against Jindal and others in a court here.

NEW DELHI: A Delhi court has upheld a magisterial court order for in-camera proceedings in the case of 16 December gang-rape of 23-year-old girl, restraining media from reporting it.

District and Sessions Judge R K Gauba said there was nothing "illegal" or "improper" in the 7 January order of the magistrate.

"The Metropolitan Magistrate was not only within her rights, but rather duty-bound to apply the provisions of section 327 (2) (conducting in-camera proceedings in cases of rape and related offences) of the CrPC to the proceedings of the case," the judge said.

"The fact that a large crowd had entered her court room leaving no space for even the undertrial prisoners to be brought in only added to the circumstances leading to passing of the order," the judge added.

On 7 January, a magistrate had restrained the media from reporting and publishing the proceedings of the case in the court, noting that the courtroom was jam-packed with members of the bar and general public who were unconnected with the case and not prepared to leave it due to which the accused could not be produced before her.

The Sessions court said as per section 327(2) CrPC, it is mandatory for the presiding officer to hold the proceedings in-camera in cases of rape and related offences.

Noting that the arguments of the petitioner advocates that the case is still at the stage of committal and not trial, the judge observed, "Eventually the trial court would also be required to regulate proceedings in terms of section 327 of the CrPC."

During the arguments, Public Prosecutor Rajiv Mohan opposed the plea saying the relief sought in the petition is against the provisions of the CrPC and hence it is liable to be dismissed with cost.

The magistrate?s order was challenged by advocates D K Mishra and Poonam Kaushik, seeking setting aside of the decision for in-camera hearing and had alleged that the court room was crowded because of the presence of large number of policemen.

MUMBAI: A Delhi court has allowed Zee Group chairman Subhash Chandra to undergo a lie detector test in the presence of his lawyer on a plea filed by him based on the advice of his doctors.

Allowing the plea of Chandra, Metropolitan Magistrate Gaurav Rao said, ?As far as accused Subhash Chandra is concerned, he has consented for the test. I have gone through his statement?.

?In terms of his statement as well as in terms of input provided by Dr Asha Srivastava, Senior Scientific Officer..., which have been made aware to the accused, the accused shall consult his doctor and thereafter undergo the test.

?The test shall be conducted... the accused shall have the right to take along with him his counsel.?

Zee News Limited (ZNL) is fighting a legal battle with Congress MP Naveen Jindal who has alleged that the Zee News editors Sudhir Chaudhary and Samir Ahluwalia tried to extort Rs 1 billion from his company officials to go slow on its coverage of alleged Coal scam.

Jindal?s company is also alleged to have benefited from arbitrary allocation of coal blocks by the Government of India.

The court also rejected Delhi Police plea to subject the two arrested editors for the polygraph test as they refused to give their consent. The court, however, granted permission to the police to collect voice sample of Ahluwalia and Chaudhary.

Chaudhary and Ahluwalia were arrested on 27 November and are presently lodged in Tihar jail. The two will remain in judicial custody till 22 December after their bail plea was rejected.

Dismissing Delhi Police?s plea for subjecting Chaudhary and Ahluwalia to a lie detector test, the court said: ?In terms of the statement made by the accused, Samir and Sudhir wherein they have not consented to undergo the lie detector test...the application of IO is dismissed as the accused persons cannot be forced or compelled to undergo the same as it violates the right against self incrimination. Article 20 (3) of the constitution protects their right.?