This is a speech by the then Chief Justice of India at one of a series of workshops which were organized in different parts of the country with the objective of “prompting a vigorous dialogue on the role of the mass media in respect of the administration of justice”. It outlines a set of broad concerns arising out of the reporting of judicial proceedings and discusses the media’s role in the responsible reporting of judicial proceedings.

This is a speech by the Chairman of the Press Council of India at a workshop for journalists on reporting of criminal trials. It provides a broad overview of the law on the point and the conflict between the media and the judiciary, in the context of the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

The Guide to Rape Reporting can be accessed from the Hoot. 

This article contains details about the basic laws relating to reporting of court proceedings. It contains guidelines for journalists that indicate how court proceedings must be reported and also explains the various situations where court proceedings may not be reported.

The article examines the exercise of contempt jurisdiction by courts to restrict publication of judicial proceedings, in the context of a 2001 order of the Delhi High Court barring reporting of proceedings of a particular case in the media.

This article is a critique of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Sahara v. SEBI. It suggests that the doctrine of “postponement” propounded by the Supreme Court is analogous to prior restraint and not immune to arbitrary interpretation. Indeed, it could well become an instrument in the hands of wealthy and influential litigants, to subvert the course of open justice.

This article is a comment on media perceptions of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Sahara v. SEBI. The author suggests that the media should not see the decision as an overreaction by the judiciary, but rather “build on the clarity that the Court has brought to the issue and cast itself as a participant in – rather than a victim of – orders aimed at striking a balance between the freedom of the press and the right of a litigant to a fair trial”.

This article is a critique of the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Sahara v. SEBI case, and suggests that the creation of such a special remedy without a clear legislative mandate is fraught with dangers of abuse.

The article deals with civil rights concerns around the prosecution of a civil liberties activist under an anti-terror legislation, the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act [since repealed]. In particular, it mentions the trial at the designated court being in-camera, thereby raising serious concerns about the fairness of the proceedings.