Media's 'public function': Impact of Delhi HC verdict on press freedom, privacy, Pg12

Key Highlights:

• The Delhi High Court ruled that private media houses perform a "public function" and can be subject to writ petitions for violating an individual's right to privacy.
• This judgment extends the "horizontal application" of fundamental rights, allowing citizens to enforce them against non-state actors like private media.
• The court upheld an order directing TV Today Network to pay Rs 2 lakh in compensation for broadcasting identifying details of a minor sexual assault victim.
• The ruling has significant implications for press freedom, privacy, and the avenues through which citizens can sue the media.

Delhi HC.png

Detailed Insights:

• The case originated from Aaj Tak broadcasting details that could identify a minor sexual assault victim, despite the mother's refusal to cooperate.
• The High Court's decision allows writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution against private media, traditionally reserved for the State or public authorities.
• The ruling builds upon the Kaushal Kishor judgment (2023) by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, which established the principle of horizontal application for certain fundamental rights.
• Legal experts note this could shift media litigation from civil courts to writ courts, partly due to delays in the civil justice system.
• Concerns include a potential "chilling effect" on journalistic freedom and the weaponization of privacy claims by powerful entities.
• However, experts suggest that genuine investigative journalism in the public interest may still be protected, with courts requiring strict public interest analysis.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Horizontal Application of Fundamental Rights: Enforcement of fundamental rights by citizens against private individuals or non-state entities.
• Writ Petition: A formal written order issued by a High Court or Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights or other legal rights.
• Right to Privacy: The right of individuals to be free from unwarranted intrusion into their personal life and affairs.
• Chilling Effect: The suppression of legitimate speech or activity due to fear of legal sanctions or other negative consequences.