NEW DELHI – In a significant judgment upholding freedom of speech and journalistic independence, the Supreme Court on Friday ordered the release of Sakshi TV anchor K. Srinivasa Rao, who had been arrested by Andhra Pradesh police for allegedly abetting defamatory remarks made by a panelist during a live television broadcast.
A bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan stated that Rao could not be held accountable for a statement he did not personally make. “Rao has not made the statement. His journalistic participation in a live TV show deserves to be protected, as does his fundamental right to free speech,” the bench observed. The court directed his release on bail, subject to conditions imposed by the trial court.
Controversial Remarks on Amaravati Spark Outrage
The controversy stems from a June 6 broadcast on Sakshi TV, a channel known for its affiliation with the opposition YSR Congress Party. During the show, political analyst V.V.R. Krishnamraju, appearing as a guest panelist, made an inflammatory remark, calling Amaravati the “capital of sex workers.” The comment, seen as derogatory and offensive, particularly towards women in Andhra Pradesh, triggered widespread backlash.
Krishnamraju’s statement comes in the context of the YSR Congress government scrapping the Amaravati capital development plan initiated by the previous Telugu Desam Party (TDP) regime. The anchor, Rao, was subsequently arrested, accused of failing to intervene and allegedly encouraging the statement with laughter during the live telecast.
Anchor Was Not the Speaker, Says Defense
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, representing the 70-year-old Rao, argued before the court that his client was merely moderating the discussion and had no control over the guest’s remarks. “He did not make the comment. He was only anchoring the show and is being wrongfully held responsible for the statements of someone else,” Dave contended.
State Pushes Back
Opposing the plea, senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the Andhra Pradesh government, argued that Rao’s behavior during the show implied tacit approval of the derogatory comments. “Instead of halting the offensive remarks, the anchor appeared to be laughing, thereby encouraging the panelist,” they said.
Court’s Caution and Ongoing Legal Proceedings
While granting Rao interim relief, the Supreme Court also issued a caution. It advised the anchor to avoid permitting or enabling defamatory remarks in the future and emphasized the responsibility of television hosts in managing live discussions.
The bench has sought a response from the Andhra Pradesh government regarding Rao’s plea for quashing the FIR filed against him. The matter remains under judicial review.
The ruling is being viewed as a reaffirmation of the boundaries of liability in media and the protection afforded to journalistic roles under the right to free expression—so long as those roles do not veer into complicity.
