Chambal Chetna censured for violation of journalistic conduct

PR/18/2003-04                                                                1.4.2004

The Press Council of India which met under the Chairmanship of Mr. Justice K. Jayachandra Reddy on 17.3.2004 censured Chambal Chetna, Hindi Weekly, Gwalior  for violating the norms of journalistic conduct and decided  to write to the District Magistrate, Gwalior  and Information and Public Relations Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh for  necessary action at their end. Shri Satish Chaturvedi, Superintendent-in-charge, EPF Regional Office, Gwalior  in his complaint alleged that the respondent paper published unverified, misleading  and defamatory news items in its issues dated December 28 and December  30, 2002  respectively alleging  that  under the protection of the Officer-in-charge he was indulging  in illegal and corrupt practices and that there was rampant  corruption in the Provident  Fund  sub-office  where the complainant  and others were issuing  fake certificates under 7A to different individuals  illegally. Denying  the allegations in his complaint, the  complainant  submitted that he had written to the respondent to rebut the allegations but did not receive any response.

The Council while noting the absence of  the respondent, held that the averments made in the complaint that the impugned news reports were defamatory and false, were not without substance. On merits, the Council observed  that serious  allegations of corruption  and minting money by illegal means had been levelled against the complainant. The complainant  

 had denied  the allegations and categorically stated  that there was  no departmental inquiry against him to the allegations made in the news reports. The Council opined that the respondent editor recklessly published the news reports without verifying  the facts from the complainant or the concerned authorities. Furthermore, the respondent had denied the complainant his right to reply by not  publishing his clarification. The respondent,  thus, honoured in breach the norms of journalistic conduct regarding pre publication verification, defamatory writings and right to reply. He had been offered to defend his action which he did not avail.