The decision of the Delhi High Court holding four journalists guilty of criminal contempt — whether or not correct in law — appears to be unwise. The wisdom of such steps has to be gauged, not in the narrow visage of whether it is correct in law (something which would be tried in the appeal imminently to be filed) but upon its implications on the two institutions involved in the contemporary setting.

I have read the allegations and Justice Sabharwal’s detailed and precise reply and the published rejoinders, and it is my view that these allegations, at the least, are not worthy of the attention that the press continues to bestow upon them.

Those who make the allegations are “honourable men” and for that reason assert that their allegations call for an inquiry — if not, then what was the need to emphasise that the allegations have been made by “eminent citizens”? Allegations of misconduct levelled against those who have enjoyed public confidence and faith should be made with sufficient specificity and proof so that they do not need to draw upon the eminence of those who make them to make them credible.

I am also clearly of the view that Mid Day jumped the gun in carrying these allegations, without examining the consequences and without being ready with all the evidence in its possession in case it was called to defend its position. However, I find it hard to believe that its article was motivated.

... contd.