'Must Be Impartial' : Delhi Court Criticises ED For Misleading Post Implying Recoveries From Satyendar Jain's House

A Delhi Court yesterday criticised the misleading manner in which the Enforcement Directorate (ED) posted information on its X social media handle regarding a search made at the premises of Aam Aadmi Party leader Satyender Jain.

On June 7, 2022, the ED had posted on X that it conducted search at the premises of "Satyender Kumar Jain and others" and various incriminating documents, including cash worth 2.85 Crores and gold coins worth 1.80 kg were seized. However, the recoveries were not actually made from Jain's house.

The Court said that the manner in which the phrase “at the premises of Satyendar Kumar Jain and others” was employed in ED's tweet “tends to create an impression” that the recoveries, including cash and gold, were made from his premises.

The Court further said that the subsequent inclusion of the phrase “and others ” in a subtle and ambiguous manner, following the explicit naming of Jain, failed to clearly attribute the recoveries to 'others' whose residence were involved in the raid operation.

“Given the admitted fact that no recovery whatsoever was made from the house of the Complainant during the search, the implication conveyed through the tweet stands in stark contradiction to the factual matrix and significantly undermines the accurancy and veracity of the information presented,” the Court said.

In this context, the Court emphasised that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) should act impartially and any information disseminated by it on its social media must be accurate and free from sensationalism.

Special judge Jitendra Singh of Rouse Avenue Courts said that the presenting facts as misleading or scandalous or intending to defame or politically prejudice an individual would not only undermine the integrity of the agency but may also amount to an abuse of power, which is in violation of an individual's fundamental rights, including the right to reputation under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“It is incumbent upon an investigative agency such as the ED to act impartially and uphold the principles of fairness and due process. Any dissemination of information, including but not limited to official social media platforms, must be accurate, non-misleading, and free from sensationalism,” the Court said.

The Court made these remarks while rejecting a defamation complaint filed by Jain against Bansuri Swaraj, presently a BJP MP, over her comments made on the basis of the ED's post..

Jain had challenged an order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate declining to take cognizance on his defamation case against Swaraj.

The AAP leader alleged that Swaraj made defamatory statements against him during an interview aired on October 05, 2023, on Aaj Tak news Channel, with the intention to tarnish his

Jain alleged that the alleged defamatory statements made by Swaraj was made in the context of an ED raid conducted at his house, claiming that Rs. 3 Crore in cash was recovered from his house and that 1.8 kg of gold and 133 gold coins were also seized.

Rejecting Jain's revision petition, the Court observed that the statement attributed to Swaraj was a verbatim reiteration of a tweet published by the ED through its official social media handle.

It added that Swaraj had neither fabricated facts nor disseminated any misleading information; rather, the statement in question merely reproduced what was officially communicated by ED.

It added that there was no compulsion stated or brought on record that Swaraj had any independent means or obligation to verify the veracity of the content, particularly as the tweet pertained to investigative findings which arose from a search conducted by the ED.

”In the absence of any material suggesting malicious intent, it cannot be prima facie inferred that the proposed accused acted with the intention to defame or malign the Complainant,” the Court said.

Click here to read order