Case Analysis on

Shri Surya Prakash Khatri & Anr. vs

Smt. Madhu Trehan And Others, 28
May 2001, CriLJ 3476, 2001 (59) DRJ
298
Presenteded by
Kriti Srivastava
(19213218)
MISSION VISION CORE VALUES
CHRIST is a nurturing ground for an individual’s Excellence and Service Faith in God | Moral Uprightness
holistic development to make effective contribution Love of Fellow Beings
to the society in a dynamic environment Social Responsibility | Pursuit of Excellence
 CHRIST
Deemed to be University

FACTS
• These petitions were submitted in contempt for expressing concern
over the insidious way in which the articles were being published in a
journal called "WahIndia" and despising the integrity and ability of
judges to be questioned.
• According to the petitioners the article in was "judge bashing". As the
petitions involve almost identical prayer, they are taken up together for
disposal. It is alleged that in the name of freedom of press and fair
journalism and without any material to support or even proper
verification of the statements, borders of decency and respect for the
judiciary have been overstepped and a distorted version has been
presented which has lowered the image of judiciary and therefore
attracts stringent action. In the article certain statements have been
made which tend to cause aspersions on the integrity and capability of
Hon'ble Judges of this Court.

Excellence and Service

 CHRIST
Deemed to be University

ISSUE RAISED

• Whether aiming at lowering the image of judiciary

and showing the Judges in poor light should be sternly
dealt with under the contempt of Court Act, 1971?

Excellence and Service

 CHRIST
Deemed to be University

ANALYSIS

• It cannot be denied that judgment are open to criticisms and in the

said case it was observed "Judges and Courts are alike open to
criticism and if reasonable argument or expostulation is offered
against any judicial act as contrary to law or public good, no
Court could or would treat that as contempt of Court".
Indeed, Section 5 of the Act now provides that a person shall not
be guilty of contempt of Court for publishing any fair comment on
the merits of any case which has been heard and finally decided.

Excellence and Service

 CHRIST
Deemed to be University

• While there is no doubt that healthy press is indispensable to the

functioning of the democracy and the freedom of press is guaranteed
under article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution; at the same time this
freedom is not unbounded or without a parameter. It is subject to the
provisions of Article 19(2) of the Constitution which, inter alia,
includes law relating to contempt of court. The freedom of press
comes to an end when in encroaches upon the honour of the court.
• In E.M. Sankaran Namboodiripad v. t. Narayan Nambiar, , the
Supreme Court held that maintenance of dignity of the courts is one
of the cardinal principles of the rule of law and when criticism
results in lowering the dignity of the courts, it must be held
repugnant and punished.

Excellence and Service

 CHRIST
Deemed to be University

LEGAL PROVISIONS
• Section 5 in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
(5) Fair criticism of judicial act not contempt.—A person shall not be guilty of
contempt of court for publishing any fair comment on the merits of any case which
has been heard and finally decided.
• Article 19(2) in The Constitution Of India 1949
(2) Nothing in sub clause (a) of clause ( 1 ) shall affect the operation of any existing
law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes
reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in
the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly
relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality or in relation to
contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence
• Article 19(1)(a) in The Constitution Of India 1949
(a) to freedom of speech and expression;

Excellence and Service

 CHRIST
Deemed to be University

CONCLUSION
The counsil held that appropriate apolozy was to be publihed and it was also
observed that the right to criticize an opinion of a court, to take issue with it
upon its conclusions as to a legal proposition, or question its conception of
the facts, so long as such criticisms are made in good faith and are in
ordinarily decent and respectful language and are not designed to willfully or
maliciously misrepresent the position of the Court, or tend to bring it into
disrespect, or lessen the respect due to the authority to which a Court is
entitled, cannot be questioned.
If any considerable portion of a community is led to believe that either
because of gross ignorance of the law or because of a wrong reason, it cannot
reply upon the courts to administer justice that portion of the community,
upon some occasion, is very likely to come to the conclusion that it is better
not to take any chances on the courts failing to do their duty. Judiciary is the
bed rock and handmaid of democracy. If people lose faith in justice parted by
a Court of law, the entire democratic set up would crumble down.

Excellence and Service