Observing that journalists should be wise enough to determine their limits, the SC on Tuesday refused to frame specific guidelines for media reporting on sub-judice matters but said the judiciary can be approached for temporary restrain on publication and broadcast of specific matters before the purview of the courts. “We are not framing guidelines but we have laid down constitutional principle and appropriate writ courts that will decide when the postponement order has to be passed on case-by-case basis... Guidelines on media reporting cannot be framed across the board,” a constitutional bench headed by Chief Justice S.H. Kapadia said.
The bench, also comprising Justices D.K. Jain, S.S. Nijjar, Ranjana Prakash Desai and J.S. Khehar, also observed that the freedom of speech and expression is not an absolute right under the Constitution and journalists should understand the “lakshman rekha” so that they do not cross the line of contempt.
“The media has a right to know what is happening in courts and to disseminate the information to the public which enhances the public confidence in the transparency of court proceedings... Sometimes, fair and accurate reporting of the trial would nonetheless give rise to substantial risk of prejudice not in the pending trial but in the later or connected trials. In such cases, there is no other practical means short of postponement orders that is capable of avoiding such risk of prejudice to the later or connected trials,” the bench ruled.
The doctrine of postponement of publication of court proceedings is a preventive measure and not a prohibitive and punitive measure, the bench explained, adding that temporary ban on publication of court proceedings is necessary to maintain balance between freedom of speech and fair trial for proper administration of justice, and is in the interest of the society.