S.No. 7                                                        F.No.14/439/03-04-PCI.

Shri Ehtisham Mirza,
General Secretary,
U.P. Rashtriya Ekta Parishad,
Lucknow (U.P.).                                                    

Versus 

The Editor,
India Today,
Hindi & English Editions
 New Delhi.

Complaint

          Shri Ehtisham Mirza, General Secretary, U.P. Rashtriya Ekta Parishad, Lukcnow has filed this complaint, on 18.12.2003 against ‘India Today’ for publishing  articles in its October 13, 2003 edition under the heading “Ladkiyon Ki Mandi” in Hindi edition and “Girls for Sale” in English edition, in which all the Hajis were blamed for prostitution.

          The complainant objected to the following lines:

          “Murshidabad city of West Bengal, a centre of Human trafficking has become a greatest exporter of young girls, now exporting them to Haj travellers for their sexual satisfaction.” (Hindi edition).

          “Murshidabad district of West Bengal which once supplied minor boys for camel jockeying to the Middle East, is now the biggest supplier of minor girls for clandestine prostitution rackets involving Haj tourists.” (English edition).

          The complainant alleged that the impugned charges was false, baseless, unverified and had hurt the entire Muslim community of the World.  The complainant submitted that according to the Islamic belief, Haj is one of the important duties of the Muslim religion and Haji is a very honest, pious, gentle and respectable person amongst the society. According to the conditions of  Haji as prescribed in Shara and Muslim religion, it is prohibited for a Haji  to have sexual relationship with over his own wife during the process of Haj.   The complainant alleged that by publishing the impugned charge the respondent had not only maliciously insulted the Muslims religious belief and hurt Muslim feelings and sentiments, but the image of the Muslims/Hajis had fallen and been damaged in the society.

          The complainant submitted that a writ petition filed by him in the Hon’ble High Court judicature at Lucknow Bench and the order dated 14.11.2003 reads as follows: -

          “This is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution particularly when the petitioners have done no exercise to find out any shortfalls and misleading of facts. However, the petitioners have approached the opposite party No.2 i.e. Press Council of India they may pursue their remedy. We have no doubt that concerned authority shall do the needful.

          Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of finally”

          The complainant thus filed the complaint with Press Council of India and fulfilled the basic requirements of Inquiry Regulations, 1979.

Written Statement

          A show-cause notice dated 26.3.2004 was issued to the respondent editor, India Today Magazine, New Delhi.

          In his written statement dated 26.4.2004 the respondent Editor, India Today, through his advocate, denied the allegations made in the complaint.  Raising the question relating to the locus standi of the complainant, the respondent submitted that article in question was based on surveys and the reports submitted by various International  and National organizations working in the field of development of women. According to the respondent, the reporting of the article was not done with an intention or unintention of hurting religious sentiment of any particular community or religion. The article in fact did not create disharmony against any religion or show disrespect towards Hajis of Muslim community but the information had been published in the larger public interest added the respondent.  According to the respondent, the complaint was totally misconceived, frivolous and vexatious and the very conduct of the complainant was politically motivated with intent to gain false publicity by defaming the well-known magazine.

Counter Comments

          In his counter comments dated 11.6.2004, the complainant submitted that the complaint was filed on the basis of real, just, legal and correct facts but the written statement filed by the respondent was illegal, unjust, wrong, not maintainable and liable to be rejected. Reiterating his original complaint, the complainant alleged that the respondent had knowingly published the impugned article with malafide intentions to defame the Muslim community.  

          A copy of the counter comments was forwarded to the respondent editor for information vide Council’s letter dated 21.6.2004.

Appearance before the Inquiry Committee

          The matter was called out for hearing before the Inquiry Committee at New Delhi on 30.03.2005. The complainant Shri Ehtisham Mirza appeared before the Inquiry Committee along with his advocate Mohd. Zafar while Ms. Pragya Baghal, advocate represented the respondent weekly, India Today.

Submissions before the Inquiry Committee

          Learned counsel for the complainant contended that by publishing the impugned article, the respondent had hurt the sentiments of the Muslims all over the world. Haj is the most pious pilgrimage that a Muslim performs and Islam puts a Haji on a very high pedestal. The scripture explicitly lay down the do’s and don’t’s for when Haj is undertaken Relationship with a woman, including even the wife, is strictly prohibition during Haj.  Therefore, for the respondent to charge that women were being supplied to Hajis for sexual gratification is sacrilege. The charge had hurt the sentiments of Muslims as a community. The paper had unthinkingly made the charge and for that they should be penalized.

          Learned counsel for the respondent weekly submitted that the article was published after due research and conversation with NGOs from different perspectives. The articles that reported trafficking in various parts of the country was aimed primarily at highlighting the malaise of human trafficking, especially of women. This was a social problem and the magazine only wanted to wake the public to it. The impugned statement in the report was a very small reference to class of persons who were tourists rather than Hajis.  The respondents had no intention to malign the Hajis or  hurt the sentiments of any community. The article was meant to highlight as to how trafficking of minor girls had become an organised crime and the impugned statement had to read in the context of the whole article. 

Recommendations of the Inquiry Committee

          The Inquiry Committee on consideration of the record and the oral submissions put forth before it on behalf of the parties noted that the impugned statement formed a part of a well researched article on trafficking of young girls. The impugned statement was based on information received by it during the course of investigation. The respondent in written and oral submissions have prayed that they had no intention to hurt the sentiments of the Muslim Community. Even while the Committee was convinced that the paper had no malafide in making the impugned statement, it felt that the paper should have been careful in ensuring that its charge aimed at tourists have been clearly so stated. The respondent editor in his written statement categorically stated that they had no intention to malign the Hajis or any community. The article was published in larger public interest. The learned counsel for the respondent had also taken the similar stand. The Committee observed that apparently it was not the intention of the article to hurt the religious sentiments of the community. However, it felt while reporting such matters even remotely touching the religious sensitivity of any community thereby disturbing the amity  and harmony in the society, the press should be extremely careful. It recommended to the Council to advise the paper accordingly.        

Decision of the Council

          The Press Council, on consideration of the records of the case and report of the Inquiry Committee accepts the reasons, findings and the recommendation of the Committee and decides accordingly.