Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Karnataka initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against two sets of accused: (1) owners, editors, and representatives of B-TV, Digvijaya, and TV5 news channels (Crl.CCC No.1/2020), and (2) the news editor, publisher, and correspondent of Deccan Herald newspaper (Crl.CCC No.15/2019). The contempt arose from news reports published in December 2019 and January 2020 that alleged corruption and bias against judicial officers of the Karnataka High Court, specifically imputing that certain judges were influenced by a particular political party and that the court was not independent. The court issued notices to the accused, who appeared and filed responses. The court examined the legal principles of contempt, particularly scandalizing the court, and considered the defences of truth, fair comment, and public interest. The court held that the allegations were baseless and amounted to criminal contempt as they lowered the authority of the judiciary. The court rejected the defences, noting that the accused failed to prove the truth of the allegations or that the reports were in public interest. The court convicted the accused of criminal contempt and sentenced them to simple imprisonment for a period of one month and a fine of Rs. 2,000 each, with default imprisonment. The court also directed the accused to publish an unconditional apology in their respective media outlets.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Scandalizing the Court - Imputation of Bias - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section 2(c) - The court examined whether news reports alleging bias and corruption against judicial officers amounted to scandalizing the court. Held that imputations of bias and corruption against judges without any factual basis constitute criminal contempt as they undermine public confidence in the judiciary (Paras 1-10). B) Contempt of Court - Truth as Defence - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section 13 - The court considered the defence of truth under Section 13 of the Act. Held that the defence of truth is available only if it is in public interest and the imputation is made in good faith. The accused failed to prove the truth of the allegations or public interest (Paras 11-20). C) Contempt of Court - Fair Reporting - Public Interest - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section 4 - The court examined whether the reports were fair and accurate reports of judicial proceedings. Held that the reports went beyond fair reporting and contained scandalous allegations, thus not protected under Section 4 (Paras 21-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the news reports published by the accused media houses constitute criminal contempt of court by scandalizing and lowering the authority of the judiciary, and whether the defences of truth, fair comment, and public interest are available in such proceedings.
Final Decision
The court convicted the accused of criminal contempt and sentenced them to simple imprisonment for one month and a fine of Rs. 2,000 each, with default imprisonment of one month. The court also directed the accused to publish an unconditional apology in their respective media outlets.
Law Points
- Contempt of Court
- Scandalizing the Court
- Imputation of Bias
- Fair Reporting
- Truth as Defence
- Public Interest
- Administration of Justice
