News channel @aajtak has responded to my legal notice with the flimsiest & silliest defense possible.
As expected, Aaj Tak claims that the inflammatory statement they tweeted was in 'quotes' meaning that they were reproducing what the Hindu Mahasabha said in the SC.
(1/5)
As expected, Aaj Tak claims that the inflammatory statement they tweeted was in 'quotes' meaning that they were reproducing what the Hindu Mahasabha said in the SC.
(1/5)
Aaj Tak also claims in their reply that they were merely reporting the claims of 1 party & that me "cracking the whip would be unconstitutional".
Again, their tweet IN NO WAY shows that the quote is attributed to someone else & that it isn't Aaj Tak's editorial opinion.
(3/5)
Again, their tweet IN NO WAY shows that the quote is attributed to someone else & that it isn't Aaj Tak's editorial opinion.
(3/5)
Aaj Tak's intentions don't matter. What matters is the content they put out.
The quote was clearly inflammatory & without attributing it to a source, it clearly can be assumed to be their own editorial opinion.
They could've easily issued a clarification & deleted it.
(4/5)
The quote was clearly inflammatory & without attributing it to a source, it clearly can be assumed to be their own editorial opinion.
They could've easily issued a clarification & deleted it.
(4/5)
To incite division between communities is a crime & to be seen as endorsing the claim of 1 party over another in the subjudice Ram Janmabhoomi case is contempt.
Given Aaj Tak's flimsy justification, I have a case that's fit for taking to the judiciary for prosecution.
(5/5)
Given Aaj Tak's flimsy justification, I have a case that's fit for taking to the judiciary for prosecution.
(5/5)
