Supreme Court refuses to ban media from reporting oral observations of judges

Media cannot be stopped from reporting oral observations made in a courtroom, as people are entitled to know how the judicial process unfolds through the dialogue between the bench and the bar, the Supreme Court said on May 3.

The court was hearing a plea filed by the Election Commission against a Madras High Court's observation that the poll panel was "singularly responsible for COVID second wave" and that its officers "should probably be booked for murder".

Batting for "free flow of dialogue" in courts, the Supreme Court said it would neither restrain the media from reporting oral observations made during proceedings in public interest, nor demoralise high courts - "vital pillars of democracy" - by asking them to refrain from raising questions.

The apex court said that its order would take into account Election Commission's submission that wanton charges levelled against it by the Madras High Court were unwarranted and would try to strike a balance between two Constitutional bodies.

"We cannot say that the media cannot report the contents of the discussions in a court of law. Discussion in a court of law are of equal public interest, and I would put it on the same pedestal as the final order," said Justice DY Chandrachud, who along with Justice MR Shah is hearing the case.

"Discussions in the court is a dialogue between bar and bench. The unfolding of the debate in the court of law is equally important and the media has a duty to report. It's not just our judgments that are significant." Justice Chandrachud said.

A bench said the reporting of the court discussion brings more accountability for the judges and fosters the public's confidence in the judicial process.

"We wish that the media should report fully what is happening in court as it brings a sense of accountability," Justice Chandrachud said.

The Election Commission, represented by senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, had sought that media be barred from reporting oral observations of the court and no criminal complaint can be filed on the basis of such observations.

Following a spike in coronavirus cases, the Madras HC had observed that the poll panel's officers “should be booked on murder charges probably” for not taking action against political parties that flouted COVID-19 protocol while holding poll rallies.

"Public health is of paramount importance and it is distressing that constitutional authorities have to be reminded in such regard. It is only when a citizen survives that he'll be able to enjoy the rights that a democratic republic guarantees," Madras High Court Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee had said.