Bombay High Court Quashes CBI Trial Court Media Gag Order in Sohrabuddin Shaikh Case

0
Bombay High Court Quashes CBI Trial Court Media Gag Order in Sohrabuddin Shaikh Case
Bombay High Court Quashes CBI Trial Court Media Gag Order in Sohrabuddin Shaikh Case

The Bombay High Court has set aside the trial court’s gag order banning journalists from both reporting and publishing the court proceedings related to the case of Sohrabuddin Shaikh fake encounter.

Justice Revati Mohite-Dere made it clear in her order that the special CBI court had overreached its powers in issuing the order.

She agreed with the petitioners who are a group of court reporters as well as the Union of Journalists that the Criminal Procedure Code had provided the right to issue such ban orders only to the high courts and the apex court.

According to Justice Mohite-Dere  such an order could be issued only in rare cases and only for limited period of time.  She further added that just a mere apprehension of sensationalism by the accused did not constitute sufficient ground for issuing such gag orders.

Gag Order Flouts Constitutional Right Of Freedom Of Expression

On November 29 last year, the special CBI court prohibited journalists from reporting or publishing the proceedings of the ongoing trial in the fake encounter case.

The CBI court order allowed journalists to attend the proceedings, but stated that they must not make public what had transpired in the courtroom.

Justice Mohite-Dere ruled that such a ban was unjustified and had breached a journalist’s constitutional right of freedom of expression.

In her ruling, she said that the rights of the press “are intrinsic with the constitutional right” guaranteeing freedom of expression. She added that while reporting an open trial, the press is not only availing of “its own right”, but is also serving “the larger purpose” of making available such information to the general public.

The judge also dismissed the objections to such reportage made by the accused in the case, stating that they had failed to prove to the court the existence of any legal provision for a trial court prohibiting the press from reporting.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here