In the midst of a running verbal battle with the broadcast media over the issue of self-regulation, Press Council Chairman Justice Markandey Katju on Wednesday came out in support of news channel Times Now, calling the orders of both the Supreme Court and the Bombay High Court in the defamation case facing the channel “incorrect” and “disproportionate”.
“I have a statement to make regarding the orders of the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in the case of the Times Now channel. With great respect to these orders, I am of the view that they are incorrect and require to be reconsidered,” he said in his speech at a seminar on National Press Day.
In 2008, Times Now had mistakenly shown the photograph of Justice P.B. Sawant instead of Justice P.K. Samanta in a story on the Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam.
The High Court asked the channel to deposit Rs.20 crore and give a bank guarantee for Rs.80 crore before hearing its appeal against a trial court's award of Rs.100 crore in damages to Justice Sawant. The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Bombay High Court's order.
“We are all human beings and we all make mistakes. In my opinion, the appropriate order would have been to give a severe warning to the TV channel to be careful in future,” said Justice Katju.
“The imposition of a Rs.100 crore fine was, in my opinion, grossly disproportionate to the offence.”
Keywords: Katju media spat, Justice Markandey Katju, Indian media, Indian journalism, electronic media, print media
verdict is based on proportionality test adopted by ECHR.
good one; otherwise it may lead chilling effect on freedom of expression :)
media now a days no more in neutral zone,they are always seen in other sides and apart from that they are busy in non-critical issues.
Bombay Highcourt order confirmed by Supreme Court is totally disproportionate in this case where the news-channel has made amends by apologizing and from the circumstances of the case had no intention to defame Justice Sawant.Courts need not be so sensitive.
Media self regulation! What! It was not regulated by itself but it is a dragon which has surpassed all ethics. It has been a prosecutor, judge in all. It shows what the viewers do not want to know. Recently it has started showing the video clip of the CD of bhanwari sexual escapades with maderna.TEhelka has also have sting ops on army officers by supplying them with prostitutes. It is highly unethical of any media house to portray them in such manner. It is blackmail by media on some who do not agree to their huge demands of ransom. We have seen mafia dons in Bihar who kidnapped rich and well 2 do and gets huge ransom to release them or kill them if unsatisfied. Media has become same. It is a kidnapper at source and blackmailer at large.
Bombay high court verdict must be accepted by all of us , this is the eye opening vedict .
In my view, imposing a penalty of this sort is correct. This is to send a though message to everyone against wrong doing.
With great to respect to Justice Katju I beg to differ with his views that the orders of Bombay High Court and Bench of the Suprems Court in Times News Channel case are incorrect. His request to reconsider these orders are premature since these orders were not on the merits of the. Case. Supreme court has clarified that High Court would not be influenced by Mondays(14th November) proceedings and would decide on the merits of the case. On an appeal against a money decree for Rs.100/- crores passed by Pune Civil Court High Court directed to make Cash Rs. 20 crores and give bank guarantee for Rs. 80/ crores for granting stay . If money is not deposited there will not be any stay but the Appeal will be heard in Noemal course. Appellate Court shall not grant stay of money decree unless decree amount is deposited or Security furnished as per Order XLI Rule 5 of Civil Procedure Code . When both courts have not confirmed the decree , the interim are neither incorrect nor disproportionate now .
This is an example of what would happen if an outside body has the power to "regulate" the press. Just a single powerful person like a judge can drive even the most fair large TV news channel or a Newspaper out of business based on a trivial error. Government Regulation then becomes a blackmailing tool in the hands of that body. Eventually all press (TV, Print or Broadcast) will become the handmaiden of the Government - just like it was in the USSR,and as it is now in Communist China.
Please Email the Editor