by Aggarwals Associates | Mar 31, 2023 | Criminal Lawyers, General
Before going into details, one must need to understand these basic terms i.e. Media and Contempt of Court. Media are the communication outlets or tools used to store and deliver information or data. The term refers to components of the mass media communications industry, such as print media, publishing, news media, photography, cinema, broadcasting, digital media, and advertising. Media is essential to our society, serving as a watchdog and holding those in power accountable for their actions. However, the freedom of the press is not absolute and can be restricted in certain circumstances, such as contempt of court.
Contempt of court refers to any act that obstructs or interferes with the administration of justice.
Media and Contempt of Court: What is it?
Contempt of court can be divided into two categories: civil contempt and criminal contempt. Civil contempt refers to disobedience of court orders, while criminal contempt is any act that tends to interfere with the administration of justice. Media can be held in contempt of court if they publish or broadcast anything that tends to prejudice the administration of justice or interfere with the due process of law.
Examples of contempt of court by the media can include publishing details of a defendant’s criminal history or previous convictions before the trial or revealing the identity of a victim or a witness in a sexual assault case. In such cases, the media may not have intended to interfere with the administration of justice, but the impact of their actions can be severe.
Implications of Contempt of Court by the Media
The implications of contempt of court by the media are significant. It can undermine the fairness of a trial, resulting in a mistrial or the acquittal of a guilty defendant. Moreover, it can jeopardize the safety of victims, witnesses, and even judges, who may be targeted for reprisal or intimidation.
Contempt of court by the media can also erode public confidence in the justice system. If the public perceives that the media is influencing the outcome of a trial, they may lose faith in the impartiality and integrity of the courts, which can have long-term consequences for the rule of law.
How to Avoid Contempt of Court
Avoiding contempt of court requires a nuanced understanding of the law and a commitment to ethical journalism. The media should refrain from publishing or broadcasting anything that can prejudice the administration of justice, such as details of a defendant’s criminal history or previous convictions before the trial, or the identity of a victim or a witness in a sexual assault case.
Moreover, the media should respect court orders, such as suppression orders or publication bans, and seek legal advice before publishing or broadcasting anything that may breach these orders. They should also ensure that their reporting is fair, accurate, and balanced and that they give equal weight to the prosecution and the defence.
Conclusion
Media plays a crucial role in our democracy, but that role comes with certain responsibilities. Contempt of court by the media can have severe implications, and journalists must be mindful of the impact of their reporting on the administration of justice. By adhering to ethical standards and the law, the media can ensure that their reporting is fair, accurate, and does not prejudice the outcome of a trial.
-Surbhi Singla
Associate at Aggarwals and Associates, SAS Nagar, Mohali
by Aggarwals Associates | Mar 28, 2023 | Criminal Lawyers, Divorce Lawyer, General
Article 142 of the Indian Constitution grants the Supreme Court the power to pass any order necessary for doing “complete justice” in any case or matter pending before it. This provision is often seen as a powerful tool in the hands of the judiciary to provide justice in situations where the law is inadequate or insufficient. However, the use of this provision has also been a subject of much debate, with some arguing that it undermines the principle of separation of powers and can lead to judicial overreach. In this blog, we will discuss the need for judicial restraint while exercising the powers granted under Article 142. The bare language of Article 142 is as follows: “ Enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court and unless as to discovery, etc ( 1 ) The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it, and any decree so passed or orders so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as the President may by order prescribe
- Subject to the provisions of any law made in this behalf by Parliament, the Supreme Court shall, as respects the whole of the territory of India, have all and every power to make any order for the purpose of securing the attendance of any person, the discovery or production of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself”
The principle of separation of powers is a cornerstone of democracy, which ensures that no branch of the government becomes too powerful. The legislature makes laws, the executive implements them, and the judiciary interprets and applies them. However, in some cases, the law may not be able to provide a remedy for a particular situation. In such cases, the judiciary may have to step in and provide a solution using its inherent powers. Article 142 grants the Supreme Court the power to do just that. However, this power must be exercised with caution and restraint.
One of the main arguments against the use of Article 142 is that it can lead to judicial overreach. The Supreme Court is not meant to legislate or make policy decisions. Its role is to interpret and apply the law. When it uses Article 142 to pass orders that go beyond what is provided in the law, it can be seen as encroaching on the powers of the legislature and the executive. This can be particularly problematic when the orders passed under Article 142 have far-reaching implications that affect the rights and freedoms of citizens.
Another concern with the use of Article 142 is that it can undermine the rule of law. The rule of law requires that all actions of the government, including the judiciary, are subject to the law. When the Supreme Court passes orders under Article 142 that are not based on any legal provisions, it can be seen as arbitrary and unfair. This can erode public trust in the judiciary and the rule of law.
Therefore, it is essential that the Supreme Court exercises restraint while using the powers granted under Article 142. The court must ensure that its orders are based on established legal principles and are not arbitrary or unfair. It should also ensure that its orders do not encroach on the powers of the other branches of the government. This requires a careful balancing of the interests of justice with the principles of democracy and the rule of law.
In conclusion, Article 142 is a necessary provision that allows the Supreme Court to provide justice in situations where the law is inadequate or insufficient. However, its use must be tempered with caution and restraint. The Supreme Court must ensure that its orders are based on established legal principles and do not undermine the principles of democracy and the rule of law. By doing so, it can uphold its role as the guardian of the Constitution and the protector of the rights and freedoms of citizens.
–Surbhi Singla
Associate at Aggarwals & Asssociates, Mohali
by Aggarwals Associates | Mar 13, 2023 | General
The Supreme Court recently said that the Members of the House have to comply with the directions of the whip and if any section of MLA within the political party refuses to do so or goes against the direction, then the MLA will attract disqualification. However, the whip is not applicable in the case of presidential election.
The Whip in Parliament:
The concept of the whip in India is inherited from the U.K. In India, the whip is an official of the political party responsible for ensuring that members of the party vote in a particular way on a bill or issue in parliament. The whip’s role is to persuade and convince members of the party to vote in favour of the party’s position. Whips are also responsible for ensuring that party members attend parliament and vote on important bills.
The whip’s authority in parliament is based on the principle of party discipline, which requires all members of the party to vote in a particular way on a bill or issue. Party discipline is essential for maintaining a stable government and ensuring that the party’s legislative agenda is implemented. In India’s parliamentary system, where coalition governments are common, whips play a vital role in ensuring that the coalition partners vote together on important bills.
The Role of the Chief Whip:
In India, each political party has a chief whip, who is responsible for overseeing the party’s members in parliament. The chief whip’s role is to communicate the party’s position on a particular issue to its members and persuade them to vote accordingly. The chief whip also ensures that party members attend parliament and vote on important bills.
The chief whip is also responsible for coordinating with the other parties’ whips to ensure that there is no conflict between the parties on a particular issue. The chief whip plays a crucial role in maintaining party discipline and ensuring that the party’s legislative agenda is implemented.
The Whip System in India:
The whip system in India is governed by the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. The rules specify that any member of a political party who violates the party’s whip will be liable to disciplinary action by the party.
The rules also specify that a whip can be issued for any bill, motion, resolution, or any other matter on which the party wishes to convey its view to its members. The whip can be issued in three forms – a one-line whip, a two-line whip, or a three-line whip – depending on the importance of the issue and the party’s stance on it.
Conclusion:
The whip plays a crucial role in maintaining party discipline and ensuring that the party’s legislative agenda is implemented in parliament. In India’s parliamentary system, where coalition governments are common, whips play an even more critical role in ensuring that the coalition partners vote together on important bills. While the whip system has its critics who argue that it restricts the freedom of individual MPs, it remains an essential tool for ensuring stable government and effective legislative action in parliament.
Recent Comments