The court also instructed the initiation of a fair, impartial, and time-bound investigation in a case involving two TV channels that allegedly labelled a local school teacher a “hardcore terrorist” after he was killed in recent cross-border shelling by Pakistan in the Poonch area of Jammu and Kashmir.
Qari Mohammad Iqbal, a respected teacher at the Jamia Zia-ul-Uloom seminary and a resident of Qazi Mohra, was allegedly labelled terrorist by the news channels.
In a significant directive, the Sub-Judge and Special Mobile Magistrate of Poonch, Shafeeq Ahmed, has ordered the Station House Officer (SHO) to formally register an FIR under key provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, along with the IT Act, 2000.
The court also instructed the initiation of a fair, impartial, and time-bound investigation in a case involving two TV channels that allegedly labelled a local school teacher a “hardcore terrorist” after he was killed in recent cross-border shelling by Pakistan in the Poonch area of Jammu and Kashmir.
Advertisement
On Saturday, the court directed the SHO of Poonch to register a formal FIR under Sections 353(2), 356, and 196(1) of the BNS, 2023, read with Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Advertisement
The police were further instructed to conduct a thorough and timely investigation and submit a compliance report within seven days. A copy of the court’s order has also been sent to the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Poonch, for supervisory oversight.
These directions were issued in response to an application filed by prominent Poonch-based advocate Sheikh Mohammad Saleem, who sought the registration of an FIR against certain news anchors and editorial personnel of two national TV channels.
He alleged that the channels had aired defamatory and misleading reports, falsely implicating a deceased local teacher in terrorism.
Advocate Saleem stated that on May 7, 2025, during heavy cross-border shelling by Pakistan in the Poonch sector, Qari Mohammad Iqbal, a respected teacher at the Jamia Zia-ul-Uloom seminary and a resident of Qazi Mohra, was killed along with other civilians.
Despite this, certain national media outlets falsely portrayed Iqbal as a “Pakistani terrorist” affiliated with the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). Saleem argued that the allegations were made without verification and not only defamed the deceased but also caused deep anguish to his family and hurt the sentiments of the local community.
Following the application, the court sought a report from the SHO, who confirmed civilian casualties, including Iqbal’s death, during the shelling.
The police report acknowledged that the media channels had initially broadcast false claims about the deceased’s alleged terrorist links but later retracted their reports and issued an apology after receiving clarifications.
It was also noted that no separate complaint had previously been filed by the victim’s family, though a general FIR related to the shelling (No. 75/2025) had already been registered under relevant sections of the BNS and the Arms Act.
During the hearing, Advocate Saleem contended that amid heightened Indo-Pak tensions, the media outlets irresponsibly linked Iqbal to terrorism, even displaying his name and photograph while falsely associating him with the 2019 Pulwama terror attack.
He maintained that such reckless reporting severely damaged the deceased’s dignity, misled the public, and disturbed social harmony.
The SHO opposed the petition, arguing that the court in Poonch lacked territorial jurisdiction as the broadcasts originated from Delhi. However, Judge Shafeeq Ahmed rejected this claim, citing Section 199 of the BNS, 2023 (similar to Section 179 of the CrPC).
The judge clarified that when an act and its consequences occur in different places, jurisdiction exists in either location. Since the defamatory broadcasts caused public unrest and reputational harm in Poonch—where the deceased lived and worked—the court ruled that local jurisdiction was valid.
The judge further emphasized that in cases involving digital media, the place where the content is consumed and reputational damage occurs determines jurisdiction.
He noted that branding a deceased religious teacher a “Pakistani terrorist” without any verification, especially during a period of armed conflict, went beyond a journalistic error. Such reporting, he said, constituted public mischief and defamation, capable of inciting unrest and damaging reputations.
Advertisement
