The Tamil Nadu Director General of Police (DGP) on Tuesday informed the Madras High Court that 159 cases had been booked against 356 people across the State for spreading fake news, bigotry and communal hatred against Muslims by linking them with COVID-19.
Justices M.M. Sundresh and R. Hemalatha were told that 86 had been arrested and 270 were at large. The information was provided in response to a public interest litigation petition filed by ASA. Umar Farooq of the Social Democratic Party of India.
The litigant stated that scores of Muslims tested positive after attending a conference of Tablighi Jamaat in New Delhi early this year. This led to a hate campaign on mainstream and social media, levelling false accusations against the Muslims, in general, he alleged.
His counsel A. Raja Mohamed said some national television news channels began using terms such as ‘Corona jihad’, ‘Corona terrorism’, ‘Corona bombs’ and ‘Islamic insurrection’ while reporting news linking Muslims to the spread of the pandemic. Hence, he sought for a direction to the Centre to act against television channels which carried such news apart from a direction to the State police to register cases against those who were undertaking a malicious campaign against Muslims.
In reply, Additional Solicitor General R. Shankaranarayanan said, the Supreme Court was already seized of the issue and it had directed the media to maintain a strong sense of responsibility and ensure that unverified news, capable of causing panic, was not disseminated.
The DGP filed a counter affidavit stating that stern action had been taken against those who had spread fake news across the State. He said the maximum number of 19 cases were booked by Madurai city police against 167 accused who were yet to be arrested.
It was followed by Erode and Pudukottai where 17 and 12 cases had been booked respectively. Further, providing an exhaustive list of cases booked in other cities and districts where the figures were in single digits, the DGP urged the court to dismiss the PIL petition.
Since the petitioner’s counsel sought time to file a rejoinder to the counter affidavit, the judges adjourned the case to Monday.
