Observing that the media “must report fully” what takes place in court, the Supreme Court on Monday stated that reporting by the media brings accountability and showed that judges have been dispensing their duties totally, as a result fostering citizens self-assurance in the judicial method.
A bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud and M R Shah although hearing an appeal by the Election Commission (EC), which had complained about becoming “castigated without any evidence” by the Madras High Court last week, stated that “something is observed in the larger public interest. The EC should treat it as a bitter pill in the right spirit.”
“We cannot expect the media not to report dialogues. Oral observations are as important as judicial orders. Unfolding of process of judicial thinking is equally of interest to the public. The unfolding of debate in the court is equally important and media has a duty to report. It’s not only our judgements that are significant,” the judges told the EC to take the HC’s comment in the appropriate spirit.
The apex court, on the other hand, stated that the HC comment was very robust but will have to have been made out of anguish and aggravation. Calling this plea “far-fetched”, the SC stated that did not want to “demoralise” the higher courts as they are crucial pillars of the democracy, and the a variety of essential remarks are normally stated in an open dialogue. The prime court also reserved its order on the EC’s appeal against the Madras HC’s scathing remarks.
Coming down heavily on the EC for “not stopping political parties” from violating Covid protocols through their campaign rallies for assembly polls in 4 states and a Union Territory, the HC had on April 26 stated that that the EC was singularly accountable for a second wave in the nation and its officials need to most likely be attempted on murder charges for permitting political parties to hold huge rallies without having following Covid-19 norms.
Justice Chandrachud assured the EC that it would attempt to balance the predicament but it can’t ask the HC judges not to make comments beyond the pleadings. Sometimes, judges say particular issues in bigger public interest, he stated, adding that “the observations by the judges are momentary while what leaves its footprints on sands of time is the written order.”
“What I am saying is not to belittle ECI. Democracy survives only when institutions are strengthened,” Justice Chandrachud stated. Senior counsel Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for EC, argued that the media need to not report the oral observations which did not kind component of the final order. The HC’s “unwarranted and disparaging” remarks had broken the poll body’s reputation, he contended.
The EC also pointed at the part of the government, saying the latter had normally shifted the duty of enforcing Covid security guidelines to the election body. Dwivedi also told the SC stated that it was the government beneath the Disaster Management Authority that had to handle the rallies of the Prime Minister and the TN Chief Minister.