The Apex Court once again delivered its verdict in favour of the freedom of media and held that media has right to report the judicial proceedings, including the oral observations and discussions made by judges and lawyers in a courtroom exchange.
The bench in the case of Election Commission of India v MR Vijaya Bhaskar made it clear that the freedom of speech and expression enshrined under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution extends to reporting judicial proceedings as well.
In the instant case, ECI filed a petition and sought for a restrain against media from reporting oral remarks made by judges during a courtroom exchange. The Madras High Court, while hearing a plea, had remarked that the ECI officials are singularly responsible for the second wave of COVID and should probably be booked for the charge of murder.
The bench observed that the prayer of ECI strikes at two fundamental principles guaranteed by the Constitution of India- freedom of speech and expression, and open courtroom proceedings.
The bench stated that apart from in-camera proceedings for exceptional cases, the courts are supposed to be accessible by the general public in order to safeguard the constitutional freedoms. The public domain has a right to know what transpires within a court during a judicial proceeding.
The bench highlighted the factor of “transparency in democratic institutions” and stated that in order to gather public faith, public scrutiny and public accountability is important. The system of open court ensures that judges act in a lawful manner.
The bench further stated that open court system serves educational purposes as well as desired individuals’ get to know the practical application of laws and regulations framed by executive and legislature.
The bench thus rejected the plea of ECI for a restraint on media coverage of judicial proceedings and held that such information is a part of citizens’ right to information.
Leave a Reply