Back
High Court Of Orissa
S. N. PHUKAN, ARIJIT PASAYAT
SRINIVAS MOHANTY - Appellant
Versus
DR.RADHANATH RATH - Respondent
ORIGINAL CRI. MISC. CASE 127 Of 1997
Decided On : 09/12/1997
CONTEMPT OF COURT - FREEDOM OF PRESS - REASONABLE RESTRICTION - FAIR AND ACCURATE REPORTING - SCURRILOUS PUBLICATIONS - APOLOGY - ACCEPTANCE.
Fact of the Case:
Two newspapers published articles criticizing the integrity of judges and the administration of justice based on a signed statement provided by an informant in a dowry death case. The articles alleged that the judges had acted improperly and corruptly in granting bail to the accused persons.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the articles were contemptuous and had the effect of lowering the image of the court. It found that the newspapers, printers, and journalists had acted without care and caution and had failed to verify the accuracy of the information provided by the informant.
Issues: 1. Whether the articles published by the newspapers were contemptuous of court. 2. Whether the apology tendered by the newspapers, printers, and journalists was genuine and unconditional.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the articles were contemptuous because they attributed judicial dishonesty to the judges and had the natural and probable effect of bringing the administration of justice into disrepute. 2. The court accepted the apology tendered by the newspapers, printers, and journalists because it found it to be genuine and unconditional.
Final Decision: The court directed the newspapers to publish the actual scenario of the case, as presented by the petitioners, along with their apologies, within one week from the date of the order. The court also directed the newspapers to file copies of the publications in the Registry of the Court within three days of publication.
PASAYAT, J.
( 1 ) EXPRESSING concern for the scurrilous manner in which certain news items have been published in two newspapers, one of them being the oldest and most reputed newspaper of the State, these applications have been filed. As the applications involve almost identical prayers they are taken up together for disposal. It is alleged that in the name of freedom of press, and fair reporting of news borders of decency have been over-stapped, and a distorted version has been presented which has lowered the image of judiciary, and therefore, clearly attracts stringent action.
( 2 ) THE Press plays a vital role in the administration of justice. It is the watchdog to see that every trial is conducted fairly, openly and above board. But the watchdog may sometimes break loose and have to be punished for misbehaviour. These words in the Learned Judge Lord Denning, M. R. 's book Road to Justice, (1955) page 78 have become locus classicus. Press occupies a vital place in the modern society. Press in this country has risen to great heights in the past. In the past when we were under foreign domination, press on the one hand awakened human consciousness towards their rights to freedom and liberty, and on the other hand posed a threat to the foreign rulers of being exposed wherever they did any act of high handedness. Yet, any institution when misused is bound to do more harm than good. Press too in the zeal of either helping the victim of oppression, or in exposing the oppressor entered into the field of investigations or trial of a pending case. It was here that the conflict with the judiciary came and cases for contempt of Court were started. In 1954, a Press Commission was appointed, which enquired into all matters connected with the working of Press and all aspects of Journalism. One of the matters considered was contempt of Court, and contempt of Legislature.
( 3 ) THE freedom of the press is basically the freedom of the individuals to express themselves through the medium of press. This implies that the freedom of press is not superior to that of an individual. In fact this freedom is fundamental to the life of an individual. In the words of Williams Blackstone,"the liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free States but this consists in leying no previous restraints upon publications, and not in freedom from censure for criminal matter when published, Every free man has an undoubted right to lay what sentiment he pleased before the public, to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press; but if publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal he must take the consequences of his own temerity. " (See Blackstone's Commentaries, Vol. IV at pages 151, 152 ). In early nineteen century Lord Ellenborough observed in Rax v. Cobbet, (1804) 29 How St Tr 1 ). "the law of England is the law of liberty, and consistently with this liberty we have not what is called an imprimatur; there is no such preliminary licence necessary, but if a man publishes a paper he is exposed to the penal consequence as he is in every other act if it be illegal. "
( 4 ) THERE is guarantee of the Constitution of India that there will be freedom of speech and writing, but reasonable restriction can be imposed. It will be of relevance to compare the various suggestions as prevalent in America and India. It is worthwhile to note that all utterances against a Judge or concerning a pending case do not in America amount to contempts of Court. In Article 19 the expression 'reasonable restrictions' is used which is almost at par with the American phraseology 'inherent tendency' or 'reasonable tendency'. The Apex Court of America in Bridges v. California, (1941) 86 Law Ed 192, said :"what finally emerges from the clear and present danger cases is a working principle that the substantive evil must be extremely serious and the degree of imminence extremely high before utterances can be punished. "the vehemence of the language used is not a
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
