Mid-Day journalists behind the bars for contempt of court

Mid-Day journalists behind the bars for contempt of court New Delhi, Sat, 22 Sep 2007 http://newstrackindia.com/newsdetails/964 High Court sentenced four months jail term to two journalists, one publisher and one cartoonist of Mid-Day daily for Court found them guilty of contempt of court on September 11 and had fixed the date for announcement of quantum of the punishment till September 21. In May 19 th edition of Mid-Day daily, a report appeared which said that Justice YK Sabharwal, in the capacity of CJI passed judgements on the sealing of commercial property in the residential areas which benefited his sons who are partners in Mall developers. The court started the proceedings suo moto Court held that an accusation against the former CJI amounts to the contempt of court as it tears the image of judiciary as a whole. As counsel of the journalists, former law minister, MR. Shanti Bhushan rejected the offer for argument on the quantum of the punishment and maintained that journalists presented the truth and truth is and explicit defence under the contempt of Courts Act”. This is to be known that after the amendment was effected to the Contempt of Court Act 1971 in 2006 truth is recognized as a valid defence in any case of contempt of Court. A bench comprising Justice Sodhi and Justice B N Chaturvadi said, “As they neither seek an apology nor do they opt to argue and reiterate their stand which has tarnished the image of the highest court, a four month imprisonment would serve the ends of justice”. The Bench said that the publications actually attacked the very institution which is nothing short of contempt. The bench also rejected the argument that after retirement the judge ceased to be a part of the judicial system and writing against him does not tantamount to the contempt of court and held that the nature of the disclosures though quoting the former CJI hurts the image of the Highest Court of the land. All four of the convicted Vitusha Oberoi, MK Tayal, S K Akhtar and Irfan Khan have been released on bail on a personal bond of Rs.10,000. Journalists demonstrated in the premises of the court protesting the proceeding against them. The Editor’s Guild of India is scheduled to meet next month to discuss the issue of the amendment of the contempt of court law. Several papers have come in the defence of the journalists and held the proceedings by the court as ‘contempt for pen’ and ‘contempt for democracy’. Reporters without Borders http://archives.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=23733 21 September 2007 Four journalists get jail terms for contempt of court Reporters Without Borders voiced outrage at a New Delhi court decision today to sentence the publisher of the Mid-Day newspaper and three of his employees - two editors and a cartoonist - to four months in prison for contempt of court because they accused a former senior judge of issuing a ruling that benefited his son. "While judges have a right to defend themselves before the courts, but there is no reason for them to abuse laws, such as the contempt of court law, to punish journalists who make embarrassing revelations," the press freedom organisation said. "This ruling is a step backwards that weakens press independence and threatens investigative journalism," Reporters Without Borders added. "We call for the highest judicial authorities to intervene so that these jail terms for Mid-Day’s journalists are not upheld on appeal." The offending report in Mid-Day claimed that former senior judge Y. K. Sabharwal benefited his son’s company by authorising the demolition of buildings. The four journalists - S. K. Akhtar, Vitsha Oberoi, Irfan Khan and M. K. Tayal - were released on bail pending the outcome of an appeal. The Editors Guild of India said the prison sentences were a threat to press freedom. Daily Times, Pakistan Saturday, September 22, 2007 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C09%5C22%5Cstory_22-9-2007_pg4_16 4 journalists jailed in India for criticising judge NEW DELHI: A New Delhi court sentenced four journalists Friday to four months in prison for contempt of court after they criticized a former chief justice in print, a verdict slammed by critics as an assault on India’s press freedom. The court said the four - two editors, a cartoonist and a publisher of the New Delhi-based Mid-Day newspaper - had tarnished the image of the court by alleging in their articles that former Chief Justice of India YK Sabharwal had ruled on the demolition of unauthorized buildings to benefit his sons’ business interests. “The publications, in the garb of scandalizing a retired chief justice of India, have, in fact, attacked the very institution, which according to us, is nothing short of contempt,” RS Sodhi and BN Chaturvedi of the New Delhi High Court said in the ruling. “We didn’t intend to malign the judiciary,” said MK Tayal, the paper’s city editor and one of the four sentenced Friday. He told reporters outside the court that the newspaper stood by its story and it would appeal to the Supreme Court. The articles alleged that Sabharwal’s ordering of the demolition of scores of unauthorized commercial buildings in New Delhi helped his sons and their business partner - builders of shopping malls in the city. ap http://www.southasiatimes.com.au/news/?p=323 SC stays sentence against Mid Day scribes Sep. 28 South Asia Comments Off New Delhi: The Supreme Court today stayed the four months sentence imposed on four journalists of Mid Day for their alleged contemptuous reports against the former Chief Justice of India Y K Sabharwal. A bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat and P Sathasivam admitted the appeal filed by the daily against the September 21 conviction imposed by the Delhi High Court. The apex court, however, rejected the impleadment application moved by 27 prominent citizens seeking an opportunity to be heard in the matter. The apex court, while rejecting the intervention application, asserted that the applicants had no locus standi as the question was restricted to whether the journalists had committed contempt or not. The bench announced that it was appointing senior counsel and former Additional Solicitor General A R Andhiarjuna to act as amicus curiae in the matter. Twenty-seven prominent citizens had yesterday moved the Supreme Court pleading they be meted out the same punishment that might be awarded to the four Mid Day journalists for their alleged scandalous reports against the former Chief Justice of India Y K Sabharawal. According to the applicants, the conviction of the four journalists was not only an assault on the freedom of speech but would also send a wrong signal to the people. The petition had claimed that the stand taken by the High Court was “erroneous and antithetical to the fundamental principles of our republican democracy and our Constitution.” In their application, they had prayed “mete out the same punishment to the applicants as will be meted out to the Mid Day journalists”. The signatories to the application included Magsaysay awardee Arvind Kejariwal, former civil servant Harsh Mander, retired IPS officer K S Subramaniam, former bureaucrat S P Shukla, Amit Bhaduri, Prof Arun Kumar and others. On September 19, the Supreme Court had refused to stay the contempt proceedings initiated by the Delhi High Court against four senior journalists of city daily Mid Day for publishing articles against the former Chief Justice of India. The High Court on September 11, had found M K Tayal, S K Akhtar (the then Publisher), Vitusha Oberoi (Editor) and Irfan (cartoonist) guilty of contempt of court. In their special leave petition filed before the apex court against their conviction, the journalists had submitted that the High Court’s order was “unreasonable” and “unjustified” and the tabloid had published the article on the basis of documentary evidence. They had also attached clippings of the newspaper in which some former chief justices had opined that there should be judicial probe into the allegations against the former Chief Justice Sabharwal. The controversial article published on May 18 alleged that Justice Sabharwal’s order on the sealing issue had been passed for the benefit of his sons who were engaged in real estate business. - PTI (Sept.28,2007)