



Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
study material for academic point of view
Typology: Cheat Sheet
1 / 5
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
The existence of free and fearless media in a democratic society is eminent. Media not only provides information but also acts as a catalyast in forming opiniond of millions of people, thereby, educationg the citizens about the happening around the globe. free media is a result of fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression. The media is expected to work within the framework of the constitution and the other rules and regulations laid down by the Press Council of India. To keep a check on the misuse by it oon the freedom provided to it, an independant judiciary is necessary. The working of both judiciary and media in harmony are important for the working of the democracy and for ensuring maximum justice. However, often when the media tries to interfere with thw administration of justice, the judiciary using its powers guaranteed by constituion, imposes reasonable restrictions on media's freedom of speech and expression as specified in Article 19(2) of constitution. One such reasonable restriction specifies is contempt of court. Contempt of court is a medium through which the judiciary upholds it dignity. This limitation ensures that no outside force can intrude into the course of justice. Apart from Article 19(2), 129(2) and 215(3) of the constitution protect the contempt of court proceedings. CONTEMPT OF COURT ACT, 1971: The first legislation was the Contempt of Court Act, 1926 which after several amendments is Contempt of Court Act, 1971. Being courts of record, the supreme court and high court have inherent power to take
proceedings under contempt of court. Sec.2(b) and (c) of the said Act define civil and criminal contempt respectively. Civil Contempt is the disobedience of the orders of court. Criminal Contempt refers to any publication which scandalizes the court, prejudices the proceedings, interferes with administration of justice. The publication which fail to fulfil the condition mentioned in section 3 would not lead to contempt of courts as section 3 protects an individual from contempt proceedings if done in ignorance of a pending suit. The defence available to contempt proceedings are mentioned in section 4 and 5. It is to be noted that it wont amount to contempt of court when the publication is not made during the pendency of the suit. Furthermore, the question of pendency would not occur when the contempt is relating to sec.2(c)(i) i.e. scandalizing any court. INTERFERENCE BY MEDIA: The reason behind initiating contempt proceedings is not to restrict freedom of speech and expression but to stop disruption of justice. Sometimes due to over enthusiasm media tends to cross the limits by vigilant reporting in matters which are subjudice. This results in media trials, wrong public opinion, giving away of misinformation. The important aspect of public faith in the justice of the country gets affected.
According to sec.4 of the act, there can be no contempt of court proceedings against the media when the publication of the report of judicial proceedingd is fair and accurate, subject to sec.7. Sec.5 allows a fair criticism of any case which has been heard and decided. The reason behind inclusion of fair criticism is that justuce should be seen to be done and should be open to scrutimy. In the landmark case of Ram Dayal v. State of uttar pradesh, the supreme court laid the test to judge whether a particular publication is fair and reasonable. It stated that if the criticism is likely to hinder the administration of justice or threaten the offence of public in the court of justice; the criticism shall not be considered on fair and accurate. In the most recent case of Prashant Bhushan and Anothrt, The supreme court initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Advocate Prashant Bhushan and Twitter India, on the basis of two tweets posted by Bhushan on the social media platform. On 29june 2020, he publishd a tweet about Cheif Justice Of India, accomapined by a picture of CJI Bobde on a motorcycle. On 2 July, Mehak Maheshwari filed a petition against him requesting the court to initiate contempt proceedings for the tweet, alleging that “ it inspired a feeling of no-confidence” in the indpendence of the judiciary and amounted to “scandalizing the court”. The court fined Bhushan INR 1. He was required to pay this before 15 september 2020. Further, in the event of non-compilance
Bhushan would be punished with 3 months imprisonment and debarred from practising law for 3 years. He ultimately paid the fine before the given deadline. In January 2021, The supreme court observed that criticism of courts if “growing and everybody is now doing it” while giving three weeks to Cartoonist Rachita Taneja, to file her reply on the plea seeking contempt action for her alleged scandalous tweets against judiciary. CONCLUSION: The public can be a part of the democracy only when there is transparency in the functioning of every pillar. Thus except for certain cases openness should be the order of the day for the judiciary as its strength lies in the confidence of the people