AG says media reportage on pending cases a ‘contempt’

Certain kind of media reportage in pending matters was critically referred to before the Supreme Court by Attorney General K K Venugopal on Tuesday who said it “totally forbidden” and may amount to contempt of court.

The top law officer was appearing before a bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar to assist it in the hearing of the 2009 contempt case against activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan and journalist Tarun Tejpal.

Venugopal was granted time to reformulate certain issues for its consideration in the contempt case in which the apex court in November 2009 had issued notices to Bhushan and Tejpal for allegedly casting aspersions on some sitting and former top court judges in an interview to news magazine ‘Tehelka’. Tejpal was the editor of the magazine.

Venugopal, during the brief hearing via video conferencing, referred to the comments of “electronic and print media” in pending court cases and said that they are “totally forbidden”.

“Today electronic media and print media are commenting on cases which are pending and it is seeking to influence the court,” he said. Today, in big cases when bail applications are about to come up for hearing, TV reports are shown which are very “damaging for the accused who has filed the bail application”, he said.

He also referred to the media reporting in the Rafale case and said that such comments about pending cases should not be made.

“These things are totally forbidden and may amount to contempt of court,” Venugopal said, adding that he would like to discuss it with senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, counsel for Bhushan, and all other lawyers appearing in the matter.

The bench, which also comprised Justices B R Gavai and Krishna Murari, took note of the submissions of Venugopal and said that he can consider reformulating the points which are required to be dealt by the bench and listed the case for further hearing on November 4. “In the meantime, the Registrar judicial to get in touch with Harish Salve” to discuss the case and request him to appear before it on the next date of hearing, the order said.

Dhavan, at the outset, said that perhaps some questions were needed to be reformulated in the case. Venugopal agreed to the views and said that perhaps a fresh look at the proposition given by Dhavan was needed.

Earlier, the top court had accepted the plea of Bhushan to seek assistance of the Attorney General in the contempt case against him and Tejpal.

Prior to this, a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra (since retired) had decided on August 25 to refer the matter to another bench to deal with certain larger questions related to freedom of speech and levelling of corruption charges against the judiciary.