News Reports Don't Impair Court's Ability To Determine True Facts: Delhi High Court Imposes Cost On Plea Seeking Gag Order Against Newspapers
The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 10,000 costs on a man who sought gag order against Hindustan Times and Dainik Jagran, claiming that the newspaper reports which mentioned his name will have an adverse effect on the cases filed by him in different forums.Justice Subramonium Prasad dismissed the plea moved by one Ajay Kumar seeking direction on the two newspapers to conceal his identity...
The Delhi High Court has imposed Rs. 10,000 costs on a man who sought gag order against Hindustan Times and Dainik Jagran, claiming that the newspaper reports which mentioned his name will have an adverse effect on the cases filed by him in different forums.
Justice Subramonium Prasad dismissed the plea moved by one Ajay Kumar seeking direction on the two newspapers to conceal his identity while circulating any news or article on him.
The court dismissed the plea observing that it is nothing but a complete abuse of the process of law and imposed costs on him for wasting judicial time.
It added that merely because a publication pertains to a court proceeding, it cannot be concluded that the publication either tends to impair judicial impartiality or affects the Court's ability to determine the true facts.
“One has to carefully see the nature of the publication and find out as to the content of the publication will cause prejudice to the trial of a case or not. Prejudice by a publication can be of two categories one which tends to impair the courts impartiality and the other which prejudices the court's ability to determine true facts,” the court said.
It was the Kumar's case that an Assistant Commissioner of Police, who is a “land mafia” in city's Burari area, has an eye on his property and thus, there is a constant threat to him and his family members from enjoying their property.
The court was informed that Kumar's mother had filed a writ petition last year to curb the procedural overreach of the ACP.
It was Kumar's case that the ACP briefed the two newspapers regarding a case which is pending adjudication before Lucknow's Consumer Forum in connection with the dispute, only with the sole motive to jeopardise his mother's case and to misguide the court from inquiring the procedural overreach carried out by the police officer.
“A perusal of the newspaper cuttings only reveal that a suspended Constable, who is involved in a fake encounter which took place in Connaught Place, is an accomplice in an insurance fraud. The newspaper reports mentions that certain cars have been stolen and in the insurance claims that have been lodged in respect of those cars the chasis number of the stolen cars does not match with the manufacture year,” the court said.
It added that Kumar was seeking a gag order against the newspapers without bringing on record all the relevant facts and material and that the newspaper cuttings did not give any indication that they pertain to any consumer complaint in which he is involved.
“The Petitioner has not revealed the nature of the Writ Petition which has been filed by his mother and also the prayers sought for in the said writ Petition. The Petitioner has also not filed anything relating to the pending consumer case. The contents of the newspaper does not, in the opinion of this Court, indicate any kind of apprehension or danger or prejudice that can be caused to the Petitioner or his mother,” the court said.
Counsel for Petitioner: Ms. Aditi Shivadhatri, Capt. Subedita Rani and Mr. R. R. Bharati, Advocates
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, Sr. Panel Counsel with Mr. Mimansak Bhardwaj, GP and Mr. Samman Kumar Singh, Advocate for R-1
Title: AJAY KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 109