Whether a state High Court's interim orders directing media to remove or refrain from publishing court-related reporting violate constitutional press freedom under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(2).
Aaj ka motion hai: 'Kya High Courts ko press coverage rokne ki broad power honi chahiye?' — yeh sawaal press ki azaadi aur nyay-prakriya ke beech ke nazuk santulan ko chhuta hai. Main Counsel Aarav se request karunga ki woh apna paksh rakhein.
My Lord, press ki aazaadi ek constitutional jewel hai — lekin yeh aazaadi absolute nahi hoti. Jab sub-judice matters mein sensationalist coverage fair trial ke adhikar ko khatm karti hai, tab High Court ka yeh kartavya ban jaata hai ki woh apni inherent powers ka upyog kare — aur CRPC Section 482 precisely isi liye exist karta hai. Isliye hum kehte hain ki High Courts ko broad power honi chahiye taaki woh press coverage ko restrain kar sakein jahan nyay ka hित praatibaddh ho.
Ref: CRPC 1973 · Section 482
My Lord, Aarav sahab ne Section 482 ki inherent powers ko itna broad padhne ki koshish ki hai ki Press ki azaadi hi khatam ho jaye — lekin yeh provision ka asli maqsad 'abuse of process of any Court' rokna hai, na ki ek sweeping media gag order banana. Article 19(1)(a) ke tahat press ki freedom ek fundamental right hai, aur koi bhi inherent power us constitutional guarantee ko override nahi kar sakti sirf is liye ki coverage 'inconvenient' lagti hai.
Ref: CRPC 1973 · Section 482; CRPC 1973 · Section 482
My lord, vipaksh ka yeh kehna ki press ki swatantrata absolute hai — yeh ek half-truth hai. CrPC Section 482 saaf kehta hai ki High Court ko inherent power hai 'to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice' — aur jab prejudicial media coverage kisi sub-judice matter ko influence karne lage, tab press restraint wahi 'ends of justice' secure karna hai, unhe rokna nahi. Press Council Act Section 15 khud yeh manta hai ki press ki conduct judicial proceeding ke daayare mein aa sakti hai — to accountability ka principle already established hai. My lord, broad power ka matlab arbitrary power nahi hota — iska matlab hai ki High Court ke paas adequate tool ho taaki jab zaroorat pade, woh swiftly aur effectively act kar sake.
Ref: CRPC 1973 · Section 482; THE PRESS COUNCIL ACT, 1978 · Section 15
My lord, Paksh ne Section 482 ko 'broad power' ka license samajh liya hai — lekin yeh provision sirf tab apply hoti hai jab 'abuse of process' ya 'ends of justice' ka clear case ho, na ki sirf isliye ki press ki khabar embarrassing ho. Press ki aazaadi ek fundamental constitutional right hai, aur inherent powers ka istemal uss right ko routinely kuchalne ke liye nahi kiya ja sakta — yeh powers exception hain, rule nahi. Vipaksh yahi kehna chahta hai: High Court ki supervisory aur inherent jurisdiction judicial process ki raksha ke liye hai, press ko silence karne ka blanket tool nahi.
Ref: CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 · Section 482-2; CRPC 1973 · Section 482
Ek taraf ka kehna hai ki High Courts ko CrPC Section 482 ke tahat inherent powers milti hain jo press coverage rok sakti hain jab justice ki zaroorat ho — doosri taraf ka kehna hai ki Press Council Act, 1978 ka Section 15 aur 23 milkar ek alag regulatory framework banate hain, isliye courts ko seedha restraint nahi lagna chahiye. Hamaari balanced legal suggestion yeh hai: High Court apni inherent powers ka istemal sirf tab kare jab judicial proceedings ki fairness ko sach mein khatara ho, aur Press Council jaisi statutory bodies ko pehle mauka diya jaye — blanket restraint constitutional rights par bhaari padta hai. Ab aap citizens in dono views ko rate karein aur batayein ki kaun sa legal approach aapko zyada sahi lagta hai.
Ref: CRPC 1973 · Section 482-2; THE PRESS COUNCIL ACT, 1978 · Section 15; THE PRESS COUNCIL ACT, 1978 · Section 23