Supreme Court Ruling on Court Proceedings Publication May Hamper Public Faith on Indian Justice Delivery System

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to frame guidelines across the board for reporting sub-judice matters but laid down a constitutional principle under which aggrieved parties can seek postponement of publication of court hearings. 

A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia said it was laying down the constitutional principle which will allow the aggrieved parties to seek from appropriate court the postponement of the publication of court hearings. 

The bench said the concerned court will decide the question of postponement of reporting court proceedings on case-by-case basis. 

“We are not framing guidelines but we have laid down constitutional principle and appropriate writ courts will decide when the postponement order has to be passed on case-by-case basis,” the bench also comprising justices D K Jain, S S Nijjar, Ranjana Prakash Desai and J S Khehar said.

“Hence, guidelines on media reporting cannot be framed across the board,” the bench said.

While propounding the doctrine of postponement of publication of court proceedings, the bench said it is a preventive measure and not a prohibitive and punitive measure. 

It further said 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. 

The bench said the postponement of publication of court proceedings would be required where there is a substantial risk of prejudicing the trial and administration of justice. 

Further the CJI, who read the judgement, said reasonable restrictions on reporting of court proceedings were needed for societal interest and this doctrine of postponement is one of “neutralising technique“. 

The apex court has undertaken the exercise of framing guidelines after receiving complaints of breach of confidentiality during the hearing of a dispute between Sahara Group and market regulator SEBI.

The issue of breach of confidentiality came up when certain documents regarding the dispute between Sahara and SEBI were leaked to the media. 

Source: The Hindu 

Dinesh Singh Rawat Says;

This decision by Supreme Court may ease  public pressure and media trail on administration of Justice, but It would hamper an important edict of Justice, The Justice should be manifested long with justice has been done".

Because, It enhances the  public faith on Justice Delivery system ultimately helps in maintaining society in order, which is the prime goal of any justice Delivery System including India's.

If, as Supreme Court in its order says that,"it was laying down the constitutional principle which will allow the aggrieved parties to seek from appropriate court the postponement of the publication of court hearings. 

The bench said the concerned court will decide the question of postponement of reporting court proceedings on case-by-case basis. "

Which clearly means in very case loser in case would approach concerned court with this Supreme Court authority in hand and could able to order not to publish the court proceedings by Media, and the chances of misuse would be high in all those cases involving high ranked persons.

Moreover, It would increase extra burden of cases on already overburden Indian courts, which are now aiming at "Justice for All "

Lastly, Manifestation of Justice among commons that in front of law all are equal would fade further as, they could not be able to know who is facing law for whom, which they easy know through media publication of court proceedings now?

Last and not the least Though media publications of court proceedings public eye keep watch on behavior and actions of Judiciary , continuous bad actions put question mark over intention of judicial officers, whereas, good acts enhance public faith on Justice delivery system.

In Country Like India, where there Judiciary is kept out with least checks to maintain its independence, but blocking even social check by society through media publications of their actions and behaviors  during delivering justice would be like becoming omnipotent without public responsibility in background that the process to select High Judiciary in India is dubious and completely opaque??