LexIN RE : HARIJAI SINGH AND ANR. versus IN RE : VIJAY KUMAR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
IN RE : HARUAI SINGH AND ANR. A IN RE : VUA Y KUMAR SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 (KULDEEP SINGH AND FAIZAN UDDIN, JJ.] B Constitution of India: Article 19(J)(a). Freedom of press part of freedom of speech and eJ.pression-Mother of all liberties in a democratic society-Freedom of press is not absolutely unlimited and unfettered-Element of responsibility must be present in the C conscience of the Joumalists--Rights of press to be recognised with its duties and responsibilities towards the society-Newspaper publishing improper and false news must be punished by cowt of law. Common cause a regd. society filed a writ petition against alleged misuse and arbitrary exercise of discretionary power by the Petroleum and D Natural Gas Ministry in relation to allotment of retail outlets for petroleum products and LPG Dealership from discretionary quota. During the pendency of writ petition a Box news under caption "pumps for all" was published in the Sunday Tribune on March 10, 1996 stating that Petroleum Minister has made 17 allotments of petrol pumps and gas agencies to relatives of the then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao out of his discretionary quota though. the allotment under this caD only be made to the weaker section of the society and war-widows. It also stated that two children of Lok Sabha Speaker Shiv Raj Patil and two sons of a Senior Judge of Supreme Court have also been favoured. Similar News item was also published in Hindi Newspaper Punjab Kesari dated March 10, 1996 which stated that 17 relatives of the Prime Minister Narasimha Rao have been allotted petrol pumps or gas agencies out of the discretionary quota. Then it went on to add that the list includes E F names of two sons of Mr. Ahmadi, Chief Justice of India. G Notice was issued by the Supreme Court to the Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. In his affidavit dated March 20, 1996 he stated that since the allegations regarding allotment under the discretion- ary quota in favour of two sons of senior Judge of Supreme Court are vague and in the absence of specific names it is difficult to deal with the same. On H 411 ·' 412 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 6 S.C.R. A the request of Additional Solicitor General time was granted to file further affidavit of a respvnsible officer and it was further directed that relevant files be produced in Court. Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Govt. of India in his affidavit dated March 28, 1996 categorically stated that there B was no allotment in favour of son/sons of any Supreme Court Judge. c Since the allegations were completely false, contempt proceedings were initiated again~t the Editors and Publishers of the Sunday Tribune, Chandigarh and the Punjab Kesari, Jalandhar and show cause notices were issued to them. Editor of ''The Sunday Tribune" Hari Jai Singh filed affidavit admit- ting that the news item published in Sunday Tribune dated March 10, 1996 with regard to the allotment of petrol outlets to the sons of Senior Judge of the Supreme Court was not correct and therefore tendered unqualified D apology and prayed for mercy and pardon. He further stated that it was an inadvertent publication as the news item was supplied by an experienced journalist Dina Nath Misra who is a journalist of 30 years standing. He submitted that he has the highest respect for the Judiciary in general and to this Court in particular and E tendered his unqualified apology with a feeling of remorse. It was further submitted that an apology was already published in the Tribune dated May 10, 1996. Similarly affidavit was also filed by Publisher of the Tribune Lt. Col. S.L. Dheer, tendering his apology and prayed for mercy and pardon due .to Bonafide Mistake. F Vijay Kumar Chopra, Editor and Publisher of Punjab Kesari, Jalandhar also filed his affidavit and stated that news item was published on the basis of report sent by a senior Journalist which due to inadvertence escaped the attention of the Editor. And an apology was carried out prominently in the Newspaper on April 7, 1996. He also tendered his un- G conditional and unqualified apology. Thereafter a contempt notice was issued to Dina Nath Misra and he ·.~. filed an affidavit on August 1, 1996 and admitted that a capsule item about the allotment of Petrol Pumps to the sons of senior Judge of the Supreme Court was not factually correct and he tendered his unqualified apology for H
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.