Court vacates restraining order on student leader for speaking to media

The Court of Hina Parveen Goney, Fourth Additional Munsiff, Jammu, has vacated the interim directions earlier passed whereby the court had temporarily restrained Vikas Sharma, a student leader, from issuing statements against the working and functioning of Jammu University and its officials.

Sharma, who is former president, Jammu University Research Scholars Executive Association (JURSEA), and presently a research scholar in Buddhist Studies, University of Jammu, was restrained from indulging in “false, vexatious, scandalous and inflammatory propaganda against the university” on October 31 last year.

The restraining orders were meant for Sharma not to air, telecast, publish or give any interview to any media house (print or electronic) with regard to functioning of Jammu University and its officials in any manner whatsoever till next date of hearing. The said interim directions had been passed in a civil suit filed by Jammu University through its Registrar against Vikas Sharma seeking permanent prohibitory injunction restraining him from indulging in “false propaganda” against the working and functioning of Jammu University.

While modifying/vacating the interim directions, the court after hearing advocate SS Ahmed appearing for Vikas Sharma whereas Advocate Anil Sethi and associates appearing for Jammu University observed that the counsel submitted that the civil suit seeks to curtail Right to Free Speech protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution of India and the defendant’s statements irking the university highlights the alleged irregularities in a public institution which is a matter of public interest.

Advocate Ahmed argued that the defendant in his press briefings had placed reliance upon CAG reports, Election Commission of India’s correspondence and university’s record which suggests a factual basis for his statements.

On the other hand, Advocate Anil Sethi, while resisting the arguments of Ahmed submitted that the defendant was habitual of levelling false propaganda against the reputed Jammu University and the vilification campaign tarnished the image of the institution in the eyes of the civil society.

After considering submissions of both the sides, the Fourth Additional Munsiff, Jammu, observed and directed that having considered the pleadings, documents and legal principles, the court finds that plaintiff (JU) had not established a prima facie case for continuing the interim direction and directed that the suit would proceed for trial on merits, but did not extend the interim directions earlier passed on October 31st, 2024.