LI Network
Published on: November 25, 2023 at 00:10 IST
The Supreme Court declined to entertain a petition filed by the editor and publisher of Patrika Daily Newspaper challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s contempt of court finding.
The High Court had held them guilty of contempt for publishing a report in 2012 that leveled allegations against judges.
The bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshhu Dhulia, expressed disinterest in interfering with the High Court’s judgment, leading to the withdrawal of the petition by Dhananjay Pratap Singh, Jabalpur Local Editor of Patrika News Daily, and Vinod Kumar Jain, Prakashak and Mudrak, Rajasthan Patrika Pvt Ltd.
In August of this year, the High Court imposed a fine of Rs One Lakh each on the petitioners for publishing an anonymous letter containing allegations of a caucus involving local judges and advocates in Jabalpur. The contempt complaint was filed by a practicing advocate.
Justice Kaul expressed disappointment with the publication, stating, “It is atrocious. An anonymous complaint, you are a responsible paper… This kind of yellow journalism cannot be.” The petitioners argued that the newspaper merely republished the anonymous letter, but Justice Kaul questioned the credibility given to an unsigned complaint.
The petitioners contended that the contempt petition was filed without the consent of the Advocate General, but the bench asserted that the Court could take up a contempt case suo motu. Ultimately, after some arguments, the petition was withdrawn, leading to its dismissal.
Before the High Court, the editor and publisher argued that they had reiterated the contents of the letter without intending to tarnish the judiciary’s image. However, the Court held that, as responsible figures in the press, they were required to act responsibly and verify the authenticity of the unsigned letter before publishing.
Citing the definition of ‘criminal contempt,’ the High Court emphasized that any attempt to scandalize or lower the authority of a court falls under this category.
Despite the expression of regret and unconditional apology, the Court imposed a fine of Rs. 1,00,000 each, considering the passage of more than a decade since the publication of the news item.
Case Title: DHANANJAY PRATAP SINGH vs. MUKESH KUMAR AGRAWAL