No intention to act against Newslaundry journalist, Delhi High Court clarifies
The Delhi High Court on Friday clarified that it has no intention of taking action against journalist Manisha Pande or prejudicing her professional career, a day after its oral remarks during a hearing sparked widespread discussion on social media.
The court also made it clear that it was not attempting to gag the media, responding to the manner in which its earlier observations from Thursday’s proceedings were circulated online.
A Division Bench comprising Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla was hearing appeals filed by TV Today, the broadcasting arm of the India Today Group, and digital news platform Newslaundry in connection with a dispute involving allegations of copyright infringement and defamation.
During Thursday’s hearing, the Bench had orally objected to the use of what it described as an unparliamentary expression during a programme featuring Pande and remarked that she “doesn’t know the basic fundamentals of decency in reporting.” The court had also observed that it could consider making her a party to the proceedings and that any order passed might place her career in “disarray.” These remarks were subsequently widely shared on social media platforms.
On Friday, although the matter was not originally listed, Justice Hari Shankar called the lawyers representing both sides to court to issue a clarification. Addressing them, he said the Bench did not intend to proceed against the journalist or cause harm to her career, adding that the lawyers present the previous day had understood the spirit in which the remarks were made.
Justice Shankar further said the clarification was meant for all those reporting on court proceedings. He underlined that the court was not seeking to curb or silence the media, but urged reporters to be mindful of the consequences of selective reporting.
Referring to the previous day’s hearing, he noted that a single paragraph from the oral observations had been taken out of context and circulated separately, leading to a flood of reactions and hate messages on social media. He cautioned that if such outcomes continued, it could discourage judges from interacting freely during hearings.
The court’s clarification comes amid ongoing debate over the tone of judicial oral remarks and their impact when amplified beyond the courtroom.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Can't say when I'll return to India; legally barred from leaving UK: Mallya to Bombay HC
Mumbai (PTI): Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya, facing multiple cases of fraud and money laundering, told the Bombay High Court on Wednesday that he cannot say when he will return to India as he is legally barred from leaving the UK.
In a statement submitted through his counsel Amit Desai to the high court, Mallya said he did not have an active passport after it was revoked and hence, he cannot give a definite date of return to India.
The statement was submitted after a bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad made it clear last week that it would not hear Mallya's plea against the order declaring a fugitive economic offender until he returns to India.
The court had then asked the former liquor to clarify whether or not he intended to return to India.
Mallya, based in the United Kingdom since 2016, has filed two petitions in the HC -- one challenging an order declaring him a fugitive economic offender and the other questioning the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act.
The 70-year-old liquor baron is accused of defaulting on multiple loan repayments of several thousand crores and facing money laundering charges.
The businessman, in his statement to HC, said he cannot give a definite date for his return as he does not have his Indian passport, which was revoked by the government in 2016, and also because there are orders of courts in England and Wales that prohibit him from leaving the country.
"Mallya is not permitted to leave or attempt to leave England and Wales or apply for or be in possession of any international travel document. In any event, the petitioner is unable to precisely state when he will return to India," Desai read out the statement in the court.
The senior counsel reiterated that Mallya's presence was not required in the country for the court to hear his pleas against the fugitive tag and the provisions of the Act.
"If he (Mallya) were to appear in India, then all these proceedings would be rendered irrelevant as the statute says that once the offender appears in the concerned court of law, then all these orders would be set aside," Desai told the court.
The bench directed the Union government to file its reply to Mallya's statement and posted the matter for further hearing next month.
Mallya was declared a Fugitive Economic Offender in January 2019 by a special court hearing cases under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The businessman left India in March 2016.
