Flawed Andhra Pradesh High Court gag order on media

Whether the ACB has enough material evidence to support its charges and would it pass legal scrutiny are better left to the process of trial.

Published: 18th September 2020 06:33 AM  |   Last Updated: 18th September 2020 09:47 AM   |  A+A-

Andhra Pradesh High Court

Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court did not cover itself in glory with its Tuesday late night order gagging the media from reporting the contents of an FIR registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) against a dozen persons, including the former Advocate General of the state. Other than the claim of the petitioner that the case was “foisted” due to political vendetta, there were no substantive grounds for such an overriding order. It’s not for the media to go into the merits of the FIR.

Whether the ACB has enough material evidence to support its charges and would it pass legal scrutiny are better left to the process of trial. What should not be compromised until then is the right of the public at large to know what the charges are, more so because they were made against a person who held an important office in the previous regime and because the issue involves alleged pecuniary benefit. 

That the high courts have powers to stop an investigation or even withdraw an order in a criminal case is known. We are also conscious of orders passed by the highest courts on occasions that reasonable restrictions on the right to free speech and fair trial can be imposed by a law that is fair, reasonable and proportionate. However, courts cannot invent reasons for placing such restrictions without sufficient explanation and valid grounds laid down under the law, such as those likely to affect the sovereignty and integrity of the country.

An addition to the grounds is the propagation of hate, of late employed by the SC to impose restrictions as in the case involving Sudarshan TV. It may not be out of place to restate here the observations in a report submitted by a six-member committee headed by former SC judge Ruma Pal, which went into the question of “Media Reporting in Courts: Balancing free press, free trial and integrity of judicial proceedings”.

The panel noted that the only external interference in the functioning of judiciary should be through carefully delineated methods of institutional accountability contained in the Constitution while ensuring that the credibility of the justice system brooks no restrictions. In the absence of an innately credible justice system, which ensures courts are respected for their judgments, rule of law itself becomes illusionary.


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

  • giri

    Very true writing , unprecented in corruption case of major real estate SCAM my feeling is people of AP have right to know whether there is insider trading or not plz ask HC to order CBI enquiry to ensure justice and transparency.
    1 month ago reply
flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp