Not denigrating court authority: contemnors

The Hindu September 22, 2007 Staff Reporter NEW DELHI: The journalists of Mid-Day sentenced by the Delhi High Court on Friday submitted that whatever was published in its May 18 edition was the truth, a permissible defence in a contempt case. The contemnors through their lawyers, Shanti Bhushan and Prashant Bhushan, said the condemnation of Mr. Justice Sabharwal through the publications was made at a time when he ceased to be in office and, therefore, could not be termed denigrating the authority of the Supreme Court. They said that as a matter of propriety Mr. Justice Sabharwal ought to have recused himself from the Bench that passed the orders in the sealing case in the capital. The High Court Bench in its judgment said: “The manner in which the entire incidence has been projected gives the impression as if the Supreme Court permitted itself to be led into fulfilling an ulterior motive of one of its members. It tends to erode the confidence of the general public in the institution itself.” New Delhi Special Correspondent writes: The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) on Friday strongly deplored the sentence. Reacting to the Delhi High Court’s order the IFJ in a statement said that the coverage had been found to be factual and accurate by a group of lawyers. IFJ’s director for the Asia-Pacific region, Jacqueline Park, expressed the hope that the Indian justice system would exonerate the defendants on appeal. “We call upon the Indian Supreme Court to apply the principle that truth is an adequate defence in cases involving contempt of court.”