In a recent criminal contempt case, the Delhi High Court addressed the issue of disseminating legal documents to the media before judicial consideration, emphasizing that such actions are impermissible. The division bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Amit Sharma, stated, "The habit of releasing pleadings and documents to the media even before Courts have had the opportunity to consider the same is also not acceptable as it tends to prejudice the parties and influence independent decision-making by Courts."
Background of the Case
The proceedings were initiated against Roop Darshan Pandey, Director of M/s Brains Logistics Private Limited, along with the media platform The New Indian and its journalist Atul Krishna. This action stemmed from a publication by The New Indian on September 23, 2024, titled "Hero MotoCorp under lens over alleged court manipulation now," authored by Krishna. The article was based on a legal notice that allegedly contained contemptuous and scandalous allegations against the judiciary and the Registry of the High Court, particularly concerning the listing of cases.
Hero MotoCorp's Allegations
Hero MotoCorp Limited presented an "undated legal notice" purportedly issued on behalf of M/s Brains Logistics Private Limited. They contended that this notice lacked the name of any advocate, their enrollment number, or official stamp. Furthermore, Hero MotoCorp asserted that the notice contained malicious and contemptuous allegations against the High Court, casting aspersions on its Registry, a Division Bench, and a predecessor Bench. They emphasized that communications exchanged between litigating parties are private and that publishing such notices on social media or in the public domain serves to scandalize the judiciary and undermine the dignity of the Delhi High Court.
Court's Observations and Proceedings
Upon review, the Court found that the language used in the legal notice was scandalous, baselessly alleging improprieties in the administration of justice and casting doubts on the functioning of the Registry. Although journalist Atul Krishna tendered an unconditional apology, the Bench noted that the legal notice had been disseminated on social media platform X (formerly Twitter). The Court emphasized that releasing such documents to the media before judicial consideration is unacceptable, as it can prejudice the parties involved and influence the Court's independent decision-making process.
Implications of the Judgment
This ruling underscores the judiciary's stance on maintaining the sanctity of legal proceedings and ensuring that external influences do not compromise the impartiality of the Court. By cautioning against the premature release of legal documents to the media, the Delhi High Court aims to preserve the integrity of the judicial process and prevent the potential prejudicing of parties involved in litigation.
In conclusion, the Delhi High Court's decision serves as a reminder of the importance of respecting the judicial process and refraining from actions that could undermine its integrity. The premature dissemination of legal documents to the media is deemed unacceptable, as it poses risks to the fairness and impartiality of judicial proceedings.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.