The High Court of Kerala has blamed the media for “wrongly and irresponsibly” telecasting the news that “the court had directed the government to change the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB) Director Jacob Thomas.”
A Single Judge of the court noted that “one of the TV channels, and also one of the advocates who participated in a channel discussion, crossed all limits of propriety, gentility and professional etiquette and even made an indirect bargain for judgment to be pronounced by the court” in a revision petition that was pending.
The court noted that when a “matter was being heard as regards the powers of the VACB, even to inquire into the wisdom of the legislature, I asked the learned Public Prosecutor why necessary action was not taken by the government on the issue to correct and control the VACB in spite of so many instances of excess pointed out by the court. This was probably misinterpreted dishonestly or otherwise by some TV channels that the court had directed the government to change the Vigilance Director,” the order said.
Contemptuous
The court felt “this sort of channel discussion will have to be treated as interference in the process of administration of justice. It was really contemptuous to drag a pending matter to the said discussion... It was wrongly and irresponsibly telecast that this court has directed the government to change the VACB director,” the order said.
Inappropriate
The “issue regarding the removal of the director led to an unnecessary issue and channel discussion, to which this court was also dragged along with another pending revision. It is really inappropriate, deprecatory and contemptuous,” it said.
The court directed the State government to consider “all the relevant aspects, including the earlier orders and observations” of the High Court, while taking a decision on the removal of Jacob Thomas from the post.
The controversy
The State government had recently asked Mr. Thomas to go on leave as criticisms mounted from various quarters on his style of functioning.
Disposing of a petition, the court directed that the “government also consider that the court has been thinking of making some guidelines/directions to the VACB for the discharge of functions within the limits prescribed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Evidence Act and the Police Act.”
