Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
A.S. Anand, J.
Shamim Ahmed Shamim - Appellant
Versus
Sofi Gh. Mohd. - Respondent
COS No. 98/1976
Decided On : 18 November, 1976
INJUNCTION - DEFAMATION - RESTRICTION ON PUBLICATION OF EVIDENCE - COURT'S INHERENT POWER - BALANCE OF CONVENIENCE - PUBLIC TRIAL VS. DUE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE - FREEDOM OF PRESS - QUALIFIED PRIVILEGE - MALICE - INNUENDO - REPUTATION PROTECTION.
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiff, a Member of Parliament, filed a defamation suit against the defendant for publishing defamatory articles. During the trial, the defendant announced his intention to publish verbatim statements of witnesses in his newspaper, prompting the plaintiff to seek an injunction to prevent such publication.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the general principle of open and public trials but emphasized that this principle is not inflexible and may yield to the paramount duty of doing full justice in a case. The court found that the publication of evidence, particularly in a defamation case based on innuendo, could further injure the plaintiff's reputation and harm the due administration of justice.
Issues: 1. Whether the court has inherent power to restrict the publication of court proceedings to ensure due administration of justice? 2. Whether the balance of convenience lies in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant in this case? 3. Whether the freedom of the press to publish court proceedings is absolute or can be curtailed in certain circumstances?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court has inherent power to control the publication of its proceedings to ensure due administration of justice. 2. The balance of convenience lies in favor of the plaintiff in this case, as the publication of evidence could further injure his reputation and harm the due administration of justice. 3. The freedom of the press to publish court proceedings is not absolute and can be curtailed in certain circumstances, such as when the publication is actuated by an oblique reason, malice, or design, or when it is intended to cause harm to someone under the garb of freedom of publication.
Final Decision: The court granted the plaintiff's application for an injunction, restricting the publication of evidence led at the trial in all newspapers, weeklies, journals, and other publications originating from the State of Jammu and Kashmir during the trial.
2. The suit out of which this application has arisen has been filed by the plaintiff, a Member of the Parliament, claiming Rupees One Lac as damages from the defendant for publication of defamatory matter against him. In the suit it has been claimed that the defendant by his repeated and consistent course of conduct, has with a malicious design, embarked upon a scheme to defame the plaintiff by writing defamatory matter again«t him in his paper "Srinagar Times" published from Srinagar, with a view to reduce his prestige and respect in the estimation of the right thinking members of the society. It is alleged, in the suit, that the defendant has published in his news paper malicious and defamatory articles concerning the plaintiff, which articles were false and filthy in nature and by publication of those articles etc. the plaintiff has been lowered in estimation and prestige and his reputation has been injured.
3. After the suit was registered, notice was issued to the defendant who filed his written statement. Issues were framed on 25th of August 1976 and the case was thereafter posted for evidence. Evidence of P.W. Abdul Razaq was recorded on 8th of October, 1976, while the evidence of P.W. Ghulam Rasul was recorded on 14th of October, 1978 and that of Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din on the 15th of October, 1976. On 18th October 1976 the present application was filed by the plaintiff. Alongwith the application, the plaintiff filed a copy of the "Srinagar Times" dated 16th of October, 1976, in which the defendant had given out a block news that he would publish in verbatim the statements of three witnesses recorded during the trial of the suit in the issues of the "Srinagar Times" starting from Tuesday next. In the application It is alleged that, it was with a view to harass and black-mail the plaintiff and terrorize his witnesses that the defendant was going to publish the evidence of the witnesses in his paper and that this exercise was with a view to force the plaintiff to compromise the suit with the defendant and to deter the witnesses who were yet to be examined to appear in the witness-box. According to the plaintiff the witnesses would be hesitant to appear after reading the vulgar nature of the statement elicited in the cross-examination.
4. On these allegations the plaintiff has prayed that the entire local press and the national press be restrained from publishing the evidence which is being tendered in the court Since, in the application it was only mentioned that the "Srinagar Times" was going to publish the evidence and there was no averment to the effect that some other newspaper (local or national) was also likely to publish the evidence on 18th October, 1976 taking the urgency of the matter into consideration the following order was passed :-
"Let a notice of this application u/s 151 read with Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C. be issued to the learned counsel for the defendant. The matter being one of urgent nature, the notice be made returnable on 21-10-1976. In the meantime I direct, that in case the publication of Srinagar Times issue of 19-10-1976, Tuesday, has not already been printed the defendant shall not publish statements of the witnesses recorded in case entitled Shamim Ahmed Vs. Soft Ghulam Mohd, Tomorrow or on any day thereafter till further orders. The order shall be communicated to the defendant telegraphically, the expenses whereof shall be bornt by the plaintiff.
Put up on 21-10-1976 for consideration of the application".
5. The defendant, thereafter, filed his objections to the application. It appears, however, that the statement of one witness was published by the "Srinagar Times" in the issue of Tuesday.
6. I have heard the plaintiff
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
