The petitioner’s counsel clarified that Swarup had merely

Listen to Article

4 min read

80%

In Short

The Gauhati High Court has quashed the FIR filed against CNN-News18 anchor Akanksha Swarup over allegedly defamatory remarks suggesting the practice of human sacrifice at the Maa Kamakhya Temple during a broadcast aired in June
The comments were made during an interview with a relative of the late Raja Raghuvanshi who was allegedly murdered by his wife in Meghalaya earlier this year

Justice Jahan stated that the remarks could not be interpreted as an attempt to insult religious beliefs or incite enmity between groups

Digital Desk: The Gauhati High Court has quashed the FIR filed against CNN-News18 anchor Akanksha Swarup over allegedly defamatory remarks suggesting the practice of human sacrifice at the Maa Kamakhya Temple during a broadcast aired in June. The comments were made during an interview with a relative of the late Raja Raghuvanshi who was allegedly murdered by his wife in Meghalaya earlier this year.

The petitioner’s counsel clarified that Swarup had merely posed questions to the victim’s relatives, who had themselves speculated about a possible case of human sacrifice, given the nature of the attack and the placement of a garland around the victim’s neck. The counsel emphasized that Swarup did not express personal opinions but only relayed the family’s suspicions, using the term “they” to attribute the claims.

It was also noted that CNN-News18 had promptly issued an apology after the broadcast, acknowledging the reference to human sacrifice at the Kamakhya Temple as an error in judgment and deleting all related content from its platforms.

The case was presided over by Justice Shamima Jahan who noted that the FIR was registered according to Section 196(2), 299 and 302 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The court decided that Section 196 was inapplicable since the statements were not made within a place of worship or during a religious ceremony.

The court further held that the requirements of “deliberate and malicious intention” under Sections 299 and 302 were not met. Justice Jahan stated that the remarks could not be interpreted as an attempt to insult religious beliefs or incite enmity between groups.

However, the court remarked that the comments were “utterly unnecessary and careless,” advising the anchor to exercise caution and refrain from making such statements in the future without proper verification.

With these observations, the Gauhati High Court dismissed the FIR against Akanksha Swarup.