New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday stated that while there is nothing wrong with reporting on court cases, the issue arises when opinions are imposed on the court. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi stated that incomplete and misinformed comments on pending cases impact public perception.
Bangladesh Extradition Case
The Supreme Court made these observations while hearing a case related to the deportation of certain individuals to Bangladesh. It was alleged that due process of law was not followed. During the hearing, the bench was informed that a pregnant woman named Sunali Khatun and her eight-year-old son had returned to India. The bench was also informed that they are currently receiving medical assistance at their father’s residence in Birbhum, West Bengal.
The bench fixed January 6 for hearing the Centre’s appeal. The Central Government had challenged the Calcutta High Court’s decision directing the repatriation of certain individuals who had been deported to Bangladesh, alleging that due process had not been followed.
Solicitor General Criticized
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central Government, strongly criticized a news report published in an English newspaper, calling the reporting “tabloid-like.”
Mehta said, “I don’t want to escalate the matter… but attempts are being made to create a narrative to influence the outcome.” Mehta said that his confidence had been shaken and that this cast doubt on the intent behind creating a narrative. The bench asked Mehta to ignore them (the reports).
Justice Bagchi said, “We are completely unaffected by propaganda and false publicity stunts. Stories should not impact the lives of individuals…”
“Imposing one’s opinion on the court is wrong”
The CJI said there was nothing wrong with court reporting, “but if you impose your opinion on the court, that is an issue…” Mehta said there was an attempt to emotionally influence something that was not factually correct. The Chief Justice said that both the author and the publisher should be held accountable.
The Chief Justice orally remarked, “The problem arises when people with incomplete truths, distorted facts, and little information start writing and commenting…”
Referring to the role of the media
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the West Bengal government, referred to the role of the media in recent times in countries like the UK and the US. Sibal said that immigration issues are part of a “global discourse” and that comments and public discussions take place on social media and other platforms. Sibal said, “People write opinions on immigration in America and England. It’s not sacrilege unless you explain the motive.”
Another Deportee Case
Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde drew the court’s attention to the plight of another deportee, Sweety Bibi. She is stranded with her husband and two children. Hegde offered to provide documents proving her Indian citizenship and requested the Solicitor General to take up the other case on humanitarian grounds, saying, “It is very difficult for Indians across the border (on the Bangladesh side).”
Repatriation Considered After Document Verification
The Solicitor General assured Hegde that he would look into the issue. The bench said that once the documents are verified, modalities for their return can be considered in a timely manner. This case concerns the families of daily wage laborers in Delhi. He was detained by police on June 18 on suspicion of being an illegal Bangladeshi immigrant and deported on June 27.
