Media has freedom to report court proceedings: Supreme Court

SC calls Madras HC remark for murder charges as 'harsh', dismisses EC's plea

The Supreme Court on Thursday said there can't be any gag on real time reporting of the court proceedings, which is an extension of freedom of press and principles of open court.

"This court stands as a staunch proponent of the freedom of the media to report court proceedings. This is integral to the freedom of speech and expression of those who speak, of those who wish to hear and to be heard and above all, in holding the judiciary accountable," a bench of Justice D Y Chandrachud and M R Shah said.

The top court dismissed a petition by the Election Commission against the Madras High Court's oral remarks on April 26 blaming it for Covid-19 surge, as it was not a part of the official judicial record.

Moreover, it said, "formal opinion of a judicial institution is reflected through its judgements and orders, and not its oral observations during the hearing."

Read | Treat HC remarks as a 'bitter pill': SC to EC

The court, however, found the Madras High Court's oral remarks as "harsh" and "inappropriate", saying "a degree of caution and circumspection would have allayed the grievance" raised in the matter.

The poll panel said the reporting by media of the observations dented its reputation built over the years.

The court pointed out with the advent of technology, real-time updates on social media and other platforms of its proceedings, is not a "cause for apprehension but a celebration of our constitutional ethos".

"Freedom of speech and expression extends to reporting the proceedings of judicial institutions as well...Citizens have a right to know about what transpires in the course of judicial proceedings, the bench said.

It said the US Supreme Court, the UK Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal of the UK and the International Criminal Court enable public viewership of proceedings through live streaming. The Gujarat High Court also did so in a bid to enhance public participation in the dispensation of justice.

So, the bench said, it would be retrograde to shield the daily operations of the High Courts and this court from the media in all its forms, by gagging the reporting of proceedings.

Lauding the role played the High Courts during Covid-19 pandemic, the court, however, said judges need to "exercise caution in off-the-cuff remarks which may be susceptible to misinterpretation".

"Language, both on the bench and in judgements, must comport with judicial propriety. Language is an important instrument of a judicial process," the court stressed.

However, the oral remarks by the Madras HC in the case did not intend to attribute culpability to the EC for the Covid-19 pandemic, it clarified.

The court said it was tasked to balance two independent constitutional authorities. During the pandemic, the High Courts across the country have shown commendable foresight in managing the public health crisis. The EC, on the other hand, facilitated free and fair conduct of polls in seven decades and its independence and integrity is essential for democracy to thrive, it said.