Friday, Dec 06, 2002
Friday, Dec 06, 2002 |
| Southern States | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Southern States
-
Karnataka
By Our Staff Reporter
A Full Bench, comprising Justice T.S. Thakur, Justice H.L. Dattu and Justice V.G. Sabhahit, ordered issuance of emergent notices to the respondents, asking them to show cause why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against them under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and why they should not be punished for the same. The court posted the case to January 8, 2003 for further hearing. The respondents included the editors, printers, reporters, and publishers of 14 publications. Among them are The Times of India, The New Indian Express, Kannada Prabha, Deccan Herald, The Hindu, Prajavani, Vijaya Karnataka, Udayavani, Lankesh Patrike, Agni, Nota, The Week, and Outlook. The Bench said: "We are prima facie satisfied that the publications referred to in the note put up by the Registrar General constitute contempt of this court, and call for suo motu action against these respondents for the same.'' It observed: "While we do not consider it necessary at this stage to express any opinion on the merits of the case, we hope and trust that the Press shall, in view of the pendency of these proceedings, act with greater restraint and responsibility.'' As the Bench permitted the Registrar-General to amend the cause title of the petition to include the names and addresses of respondents, there is a possibility of more publications being arrayed in the contempt petition.
`Many dimensions'
In his initial submission, the Advocate-General, A.N. Jayaram, said: "I would not like to forget the gravity of this case because there are so many dimensions to it." The Supreme Court had been protecting the freedom of the Press. However, the question whether the Press had transgressed its limits in the case had risen. He pointed out that it was for the first time after Independence that the judiciary and the Press were on a path of confrontation. Moving the note for initiating the contempt proceedings, the Registrar-General said: "These scurrilous and scandalous allegations by respondents are grossly contumacious, and bring the entire administration of justice to disrepute.'' The respondents had not given details such as the names of persons allegedly involved in the scandal, or names of women concerned, even after the High Court had given time for submitting evidence. The reports varied with regard to the incident as well as the date of the alleged incident, he added.
`Reports defamatory'
He said that by publishing unconfirmed reports, "all these papers have tarnished the image of the judiciary and scandalised the High Court.'' The publications are, per se, defamatory, and amount to criminal contempt within the meaning of Section 2(c) of the Act. The Registrar-General submitted that he was putting up the note after the Chief Justice had directed suo motu action under the Act.
Dismissed
Meanwhile, on another contempt of court petition filed by B.G. Koshy, the court dismissed an interlocutory application that sought an interim stay on the publication of news items about the "Mysore episode".
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
