Premium
This is an archive article published on November 24, 2010

Media behaving as super jurist: SC

Supreme Court indicated that it doesn’t agree with media reporting on court proceedings in the 2G scam case.

Dubbing journalists “super jurists”,the Supreme Court today indicated that it doesn’t agree with media reporting on court proceedings in the 2G Spectrum allocation case.

Yesterday,the Supreme Court Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly had opened the case hearing telling the media personnel present in the courtroom that they were plainly “distorting” its orders.

“Our orders are available on the Supreme Court website the same evening. But just 24 hours after the hearing,we see a totally distorted view of our orders,” Justice Singhvi spoke for the Bench yesterday.

Story continues below this ad

The court today again touched on its displeasure with the media coverage when petitioner Subramanian Swamy referred to news reports that he had used in his case,against the Prime Minister’s alleged inaction to respond to his letters. The PM is listed as the first respondent in the petition.

Brushing aside Swamy’s submission,the Bench said it is not concerned with such media reports. “We will not deal with media reports. We will not deal with the arguments of super jurists,” the court said.

Yesterday’s observation was more pointed,with the judges commenting that “the Prime Minister’s name is being dragged unnecessarily for the past two days”. “Everybody has their reputation. A reputation is a person’s most precious right. The name of the highest authority is being dragged,” the Bench had said,adding that it should not be expected to remain “mute spectators” to such distortions.

“You (media) can understand the underlying message,” the court said,even as it admitted that the print and electronic media played a “responsible” role in society.

Story continues below this ad

“What is going on is very unfortunate,” Justice Singhvi observed,with the Bench raising clichés used in news reports like the term “slams”,and wondering what these really signified. “These are only conversations,these cannot be conveyed as the court’s orders. We are only doing our duties,” Justice Singhvi explained.

The judicial rap was not just confined to media personnel but also to “some section of lawyers”,with the Bench pointing out that some lawyers immediately go to cameras with their bytes.

“Lawyers appearing in a case sub judice should not be allowed to speak to the media,” Raja’s counsel A R Andhyarujna offered his take.

The court had first sought responsible restraint from the media last week when Andhyarjuna had objected to a news item that said Raja’s counsel had attended a “strategy session” with the CBI at the behest of a top government law officer. Warning the media that it would not remain “mute spectators”,the Bench had asked the reporters to “respect” other professions,including the Bar.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement