Section of electronic media has crossed the line, says Supreme Court

Source – indiatimes.com

NEW DELHI: While stating that the Supreme Court was firmly against gagging the media, a three-judge bench headed by CJI Dipak Misra on Thursday said a section of the press, especially the electronic media, had crossed the line by “writing what they think.”

The bench of CJI Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud said, “We are sorry to say some journalists think as if they are sitting in the pulpit and can write anything.

That is not journalistic independence or culture. They think they can get away with anything. That is not journalists’ right to freedom of speech and expression.” Commenting about today’s media, especially the online and electronic media, the CJI said, “We are of the firm belief that there can be no gagging of media.

But the media, especially the electronic media, should be more responsible. I don’t want to name any (particular) electronic media, but they cannot write whatever they want on their websites. Some of these writings are sheer contempt of court and also defamatory.”

The comments came during the hearing of an appeal filed by news portal ‘The Wire’ but the bench made it amply clear that its remarks were general in nature and were not connected with the case at hand.

The bench entertained ‘The Wire’ journalists’ petition and posted it for final hearing on April 12. It asked the trial court not to proceed with the defamation case but deleted Gujarat government as a party in the SC saying the state did not have any role to play in a defamation case.

The SC agreed to examine whether a story authored by a reporter in a publication, print or electronic, if found defamatory should lead to editors being roped in a defamation suit even when they may have been unconnected with the writing or editing of the offending article.

Appearing for the portal, senior advocate Kapil Sibal said ‘The Wire’ journalist took statistics from the public domain about Jay Shah’s company and found that its turnover had increased from Rs 15 lakh to Rs 80 crore in a very short period. “Can a journalist not question it? If the journalist is going to be throttled and made to cower by a defamation suit for raising a question, then that will be the end of journalism in this country,” he said.

When Kaul argued that just because the person concerned was the son of a politician, he should not be made the target of a scurrilous and defamatory report based on selective quoting of statistics, Sibal said, “In today’s world, politicians are daily vilified in electronic and print media. Should each of them face defamation case?” Kaul said, “The story published by ‘The Wire’ was clearly a manufactured one meant to damage reputations. It was irresponsible reporting with a design to pick figures selectively from statistics available in the public domain to tarnish Shah’s reputation.”

Reporters and editors of ‘The Wire’ have challenged a January judgment of the Gujarat high court which refused to quash a defamation case filed against them by BJP president Amit Shah’s son Jay Shah, who claimed Rs 100 crore as damages for publishing an allegedly scurrilous article published on the portal that claimed sudden windfall for junior Shah’s company after BJP came to power in 2014.

When the bench was mulling to stay trial proceedings in the defamation case, it drew protest from Shah’s counsel Neeraj Kishan Kaul, who said the HC had come to a clear conclusion after examining the case records that a defamation case was made out. “Right to free speech and expression as well as independence of media must be respected.

But this does not confer a right on journalists to selectively quote statistics and lace it with innuendoes to target someone with a scurrilous report just because he happens to be the son of the BJP president,” Kaul said.