Legal reporting: SC resumes hearing on guidelines

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today commenced hearing on the issue of framing guidelines for media for reporting court matters. A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice SH Kapadia said that it took up the case on framing guidelines as the reporting on the sub-judice matters is not only affecting the rights of the accused but also coming in the way of administration of justice.[caption id=“attachment_257543” align=“alignleft” width=“380” caption=“On right reporting. Reuters”]  [/caption] “We got eleven complaints by senior advocates saying that they have been mis-quoted by the reporters in the court. That is why we took up the case,” the bench also comprising justices DK Jain, SS Nijjar, Ranjana Desai and JS Khehar said at the beginning of the proceedings. It, however, made clear that the hearing is confined to media coverage which is sub-judice and it is sitting with opmind to hear all suggestions. Many senior advocates appearing in the case were almost unanimous that freedom of press should not be compromised and the guidelines might not be effective without law. “We do not need to curb but expand the freedom. We have also to be responsible so the judges. I have great apprehension . I do not want freedom of media to go,” senior advocate Fali S Nariman said. He said that judges should also be responsible while making comments in open court. “We are not here to control the content of the publication. Even before the SIT report is filed, it is reported in the media . Misreporting is also affecting the administration of justice and right of the accused in the case,” the bench said. “We cannot leave it if the right of accused and administration of justice is affected,” it said. The bench was of the view that it wanted to have a proper balance between Artilce 21 (Right to Life and Liberty) and Article 19 (1) (A) (Freedom of Speech and Expression) of the Constitution. Both the judges and lawyers were of the opinion that the main question for deliberation for reporting of court proceedings was “what are the acts which constitutes breach of administration of justice”. The bench also made it clear that contempt of court action was not an answer to misreporting of judicial proceedings. “We want interpretation of the word ‘reasonable’ in the context of the court reporting,” the bench said. It observed that there are norms laid down by the Press Council of India on every aspect of reporting but they seemed to have become just a piece of paper. PTI