In a win for press freedom, the Madras High Court last week clarified its stance on whether the media can reveal the names of judges and lawyers in news reports..Back in August, the Madurai Bench of Justices Nooty Ramamohana Rao and SS Sundar directed the Madras High Court’s Registrar to instruct print and electronic media outlets not to publish the names of lawyers and judges appearing in cases. The Registrar (Administration) of the Madurai bench went on to issue a notification dated September 9 to press outlets to this effect..This order was passed while dismissing a writ filed by advocate Baskar Mathuram in an incident involving minor children. In that same matter, the court went on to elucidate on the negative aspects of publishing the names of legal practitioners in the media..“…publication of names of practitioners who may have appeared for one party or the other in a particular case can lead to an indirect method of soliciting or indulging in advertisement of the professional abilities or skills of the advocates.”.The Bench proceeded to order a similar prohibition with respect to judges as well..“The reason being every Judge of the High Court is carrying on with his work sitting in a particular division/roster as assigned by My Lord The Hon’ble Chief Justice. The Judges do perform their duties dispassionately and to the extent possible by not allowing their individual notions and philosophies to be a guiding factor in deciding the causes brought before them.”.Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner advocate approached the Supreme Court where a Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and PC Pant refused to admit the appeal. This resulted in a fair amount of confusion among the members of the press, who were unsure as to whether or not they could mention names of judges and lawyers in news reports..In order to attain some clarity, two reporters – BSL Prasad and VM Subbiah – challenged the communication issued by the administrative side of the court as unconstitutional and void. Senior Advocate A Sirajudeen appeared for the petitioners..One week ago, on November 15, the First Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan clarified that there was no blanket ban on reporting names and that the Madurai bench’s administrative order was merely “advisory in nature”. The order states,.“Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the writ petition, as the administrative order is in pursuance to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, in the given facts of the case, with the objective of discouraging persons filing public interest litigations for publicity. The administrative order is advisory in nature.”.(Read the judgment below)
In a win for press freedom, the Madras High Court last week clarified its stance on whether the media can reveal the names of judges and lawyers in news reports..Back in August, the Madurai Bench of Justices Nooty Ramamohana Rao and SS Sundar directed the Madras High Court’s Registrar to instruct print and electronic media outlets not to publish the names of lawyers and judges appearing in cases. The Registrar (Administration) of the Madurai bench went on to issue a notification dated September 9 to press outlets to this effect..This order was passed while dismissing a writ filed by advocate Baskar Mathuram in an incident involving minor children. In that same matter, the court went on to elucidate on the negative aspects of publishing the names of legal practitioners in the media..“…publication of names of practitioners who may have appeared for one party or the other in a particular case can lead to an indirect method of soliciting or indulging in advertisement of the professional abilities or skills of the advocates.”.The Bench proceeded to order a similar prohibition with respect to judges as well..“The reason being every Judge of the High Court is carrying on with his work sitting in a particular division/roster as assigned by My Lord The Hon’ble Chief Justice. The Judges do perform their duties dispassionately and to the extent possible by not allowing their individual notions and philosophies to be a guiding factor in deciding the causes brought before them.”.Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner advocate approached the Supreme Court where a Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and PC Pant refused to admit the appeal. This resulted in a fair amount of confusion among the members of the press, who were unsure as to whether or not they could mention names of judges and lawyers in news reports..In order to attain some clarity, two reporters – BSL Prasad and VM Subbiah – challenged the communication issued by the administrative side of the court as unconstitutional and void. Senior Advocate A Sirajudeen appeared for the petitioners..One week ago, on November 15, the First Bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan clarified that there was no blanket ban on reporting names and that the Madurai bench’s administrative order was merely “advisory in nature”. The order states,.“Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the writ petition, as the administrative order is in pursuance to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, in the given facts of the case, with the objective of discouraging persons filing public interest litigations for publicity. The administrative order is advisory in nature.”.(Read the judgment below)
