Hanskumar Jain Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

HANSKUMAR JAIN, S/O SUKANRAJ JAIN, PROP- SHA SUKANRAJ MOHANLAI, HINDU, BUSINESS, AGED 60 YEARS, D.NO.9-25-23, GROUND FLOOR, GUNDUVARI STREET, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM. EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT. VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DISHA POLICE STATION, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶14

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE DISHA POLICE STATION, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶15

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DISHA POLICE STATION, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶16

NTV, REP. BY ITS CEO, DOOR NO.564-A-19, ROAD NO.92, NEAR LOTUS POND, JUBILEE HILLS-500 033, HYDERABAD, STATE OF TELANGANA.

¶17

GOOGLE INDIA PVT LTD, REP. BY ITS CEO, SURVEY NO. 13, DIVYASREE OMEGA. KONDAPUR VILLAGE, HYDERABAD. STATE OF TELANGANA-500 084.

¶18

2

¶19

YOU TUBE INDIA, REP. BY ITS CEO, SURVEY NO. 13, DIVYASREE OMEGA, KONDAPUR VILLAGE, HYDERABAD, STATE OF TELANGANA-500 084.

¶20

FACE BOOK INC, REP. BY ITS CEO, C9MG PLUS 35G, HITECH CITY MAIN RD, DIAMOND HILLS. LUMBINI AVENUE, GACHIBOWLI. HYDERABAD, STATE OF TELANGANA 500081.

¶21

TWITTER COMMUNICATIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, REP. BY ITS CEO, C-20, G BLOCK, NEAR MCA BANDRA KURIA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E) MUMBAI CITY STATE OF MAHARASTRA-400051.

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of Respondent no.2 in explaining to the media telecasted on 19-08-2022 in the TV Channel of Respondent no.5 regarding the alleged offence said to have been committed by the Petitioner with regard to the Crime in FIR No.64 of 2022, dt.12.8.2022 for the offences U/Sec.354-A, 354-C, 506 of IPC and Sec.67 of I.T.Act, 2020, and the said statement of the 2nd Respondent also been circulated through the Respondent no.6 and unlawfully been circulated in the channels of Respondents nos.5 to 9, though the Petitioner has not committed any such offence in connection with the said crime, which is nothing but high handed, unlawful, unreasonable and in violation of and Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Art.21 of the Constitution of India and Rules made there under by consequently directing the Respondents 2 to 4 not to publicize about the alleged crime registered against the Petitioner in FIR No.64 of 2022, dt.12.8.2022 either in the electronic media or print media or any other social media till a decision is rendered by a competent court of law, further consequently directing the Respondent no.2 to direct the Respondents 5 to 9 to delete the interview / statement by the Respondent no.2 in the TV Channel of Respondent no.5 on 19-08-2022, in future and directing the Respondents 5 to 9 not to upload the said Video, and pass

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Grant Interim Orders of direction directing the Respondent nos.2 to 4 ,not to make any statements with regard to the Crime in FIR No.64 of 2022,

¶26

3

¶27

dt.12.8.2022 for the offences U/Sec.354-A, 354-C, 506 of IPC and Sec.67 of I.T,Act. 2020, in any electronic media or print media, until further orders of this Hon'ble Court, pending disposal of the writ Petition and pass

¶28

IA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶29

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to receive the additional documents i.e DVD and judgments in Wp. 28942/2022 on behalf of the petitioner

¶30

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶31

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 228 days in re-presentation of the returned lA. SR.NO OF 2024 IN W.P. No. 28942 OF 2022

¶32

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶33

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to delete/ strike out the Petitioner herein from the array of parties as being not a proper and necessary party to the Writ Petition

¶34

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶35

1.P RAJESH BABU

¶36

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶37

1.GP FOR HOME

¶38

2.A P SURESH RAM

¶39

3.POPURI LAKSHMI PRIYANVITA

¶40

4

¶41

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 28942 of 2022

¶42

ORDER:

¶43

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with

¶44

the following prayer for:

¶45

“…to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of Respondent no.2 in explaining to the media telecasted on 19-08-2022 in the TV Channel of Respondent no.5 regarding the alleged offence said to have been committed by the Petitioner with regard to the Crime in FIR No.64 of 2022, dt.12.8.2022 for the offences U/Sec.354-A, 354-C, 506 of IPC and Sec.67 of I.T.Act, 2020, and the said statement of the 2nd Respondent also been circulated through the Respondent no.6 and unlawfully been circulated in the channels of Respondents nos.5 to 9, though the Petitioner has not committed any such offence in connection with the said crime, which is nothing but high handed, unlawful, unreasonable and in violation of and Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Art.21 of the Constitution of India and Rules made there under by consequently directing the Respondents 2 to 4 not to publicize about the alleged crime registered against the Petitioner in FIR No.64 of 2022, dt.12.8.2022 either in the electronic media or print media or any other social media till a decision is rendered by a competent court of law, further consequently directing the Respondent no.2 to direct the Respondents 5 to 9 to delete the interview / statement by the Respondent no.2 in the TV Channel of Respondent no.5 on 19-08-2022, in future and directing the Respondents 5 to 9 not to upload the said Video, and pass.…”

¶46

Heard Sri P.Rajesh Babu, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the Official Respondents

¶47

5

¶48

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that in the light of the Interim Order passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2022 vide Order dated 14.09.2022, the petition may be disposed of.

¶49

For ready reference the relevant portion of the Interim Order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide Order dated 14.09.2025 is extracted hereunder:

¶50

“There shall be direction to the respondents 2 to 4 not to make any statements with regard to Crime No.64 of 2022 of Disha Police Station, Machilipatnam, in any electronic media or print media, till the next date of hearing. However, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to proceed with the investigation of the crime.”

¶51