CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA versus M.R VIJAYABHASKAR & ORS.

Citation: [2021] 5 S.C.R. 196 · Decided: 06-05-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 8 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
196
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 5 S.C.R.
   [2021] 5 S.C.R. 196
196
THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA
v.
M.R VIJAYABHASKAR & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 1767 of 2021)
MAY 06, 2021
[DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD
AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Constitution of India:
Arts. 32, 226, 19(1)(a), 19(2) – Freedom of the media to report
court proceedings – High Court made certain oral remarks
attributing responsibility to the Election Commission-EC for the
present surge in the number of cases of COVID-19, due to their
failure to implement COVID-19 related protocol during the elections
– Oral remarks were ‘EC is singularly responsible for the second
wave of Covid-19 and that the EC should be put up for murder
charges” – Said remarks though not part of order of the High Court,
were reported in print, electronic and tele media – EC seeking a
direction to restrain the media from reporting on court proceedings;
and that the oral remarks are baseless and tarnishing the image of
EC as an independent constitutional authority – On appeal, held:
Language is an important instrument of a judicial process which is
sensitive to constitutional values – High Court was faced with a
situation of rising cases of COVID-19 and, as a constitutional Court,
was entrusted with protecting the life and liberty of citizens – Remarks
of the High Court were harsh, it did not seek to attribute culpability
for the COVID-19 pandemic in the country to the EC – Instead it
intended to urge the EC to ensure stricter compliance of COVID-19
related protocols during elections – Moreso, oral observations do
not constitute a part of the official judicial record – Thus, there is
no substance in the prayer of the EC for restraining the media from
reporting on court proceedings.
Arts. 19(1)(a), 19(2) – Freedom of expression of the Media –
Reporting the proceedings of judicial institutions – Importance of
– Held: Constitution guarantees the media the freedom to inform,
to distill and convey information on all matters of interest – Freedom
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
197
of speech and expression extends to reporting the proceedings of
judicial institutions as well – Courts are entrusted to perform crucial
functions under law which has direct impact not only on the rights
of citizens, but also the extent to which the citizens can exact
accountability from the executive – Therein lies the importance of
freedom of the media to comment on and write about proceedings –
Furthermore, media has over the years, transitioned from the
predominance of newspapers to internet for disseminating news,
views and ideas to audiences beyond national boundaries – This,
would also include information reported about the functioning of
courts – Hence, it would do no good to prevent the new forms of
media from reporting judicial proceedings.
Judiciary:
Open Courts – Concept of – Held: Concept of open court
requires that information relating to a court proceeding must be
available in the public domain – Open access to courts is essential
to safeguard valuable constitutional freedoms – Courts must be open
both in the physical and metaphorical sense, save and except for
in-camera proceedings in an exceptional category of cases – Open
court proceeding ensures that the judicial process is subject to public
scrutiny – Public scrutiny is crucial to maintaining transparency
and accountability – There are multiple ways in which an open court
system contributes to the working of democracy.
Judicial accountability – Public Discourse and Media
Reporting – Held: Rights of the media to report and disseminate
issues and events, including court proceedings are a part of the
public domain – This is not merely an aspect of protecting the rights
of individuals and entities on reporting, but also a part of the process
of augmenting the integrity of the judiciary and the cause of justice
as a whole.
Judicial conduct – Freedom and constraints of – Held:
Independence of the judiciary translates to being impartial, free
from bias and uninfluenced by the actions of those in power, but
also recognizes the freedom to judges to conduct court proceedings
within the contours of the principles of natural justice – Judges in
the performance of their duty must remain faithful to the oath of the
office they hold, which requires them to bear allegiance to the
THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA v. M.R
VIJAYABHASKAR
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
198
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 5 S.C.R.
Constitution – An independent judiciary must also be one whi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.