MJ Akbar Defamation Case: Judge Requests Media To Refrain From Making "Personal Remarks" About Lawyers Involved

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vishal Pahuja on Wednesday asked the media to refrain from making any "personal remarks" about the lawyers appearing in the MJ Akbar's criminal defamation case against journalist Priya Ramani.

The oral request was made in pursuance of a complaint moved by Akbar's counsel Geeta Luthra, who had objected to certain parts of The Wire story covering Ghazala Wahab's chief examination.

Luthra, who discussed the said complaint with the judge in his chambers and not in the open court, was aggrieved by what she said was a personal remark against her.

The said story was written by journalist Anoo Bhuyan, who had factually reported, among other things, about the reaction of the people present in the courtroom when Ghazala was narrating her encounters of sexual harassment, allegedly committed by Akbar.

After hearing Luthra's complaint in his chambers, the judge came back to the courtroom and said the following before starting with today's proceedings:

'I'm requesting journalists, who are covering this case, to refrain from making personal remarks about the counsels. The journalist who has done so shall stay back after today's hearing, issue an oral clarification and redact the part of the story which is being complained about.'

After the proceedings got over, all the journalists who were covering the matter exited the courtroom, as no one was clear about who was the judge referring to specifically. After few minutes, a court staff came from the inside and asked Anoo Bhuyan to come inside the courtroom.

As other journalists also joined, Anoo was at the forefront of this 'sort of a hearing' for which neither a prior application was filed, nor any notice was issued.

'We know media has the right to cover and report what happens in these proceedings, but I want you to refrain from making any personal remarks about the lawyers', the judge said.

"Sir, I want to know what qualifies as 'personal remarks' for future references', Anoo asked.

'See I don't want to pass any order. I'm just saying the decorum of the court must be maintained. I can ask the aggrieved counsel to move a formal application regarding this', the judge replied.

'Sir, isn't the act of laughing when a witness is giving her statements also amount to the violation of court's decorum', Anoo asked.

Anoo had written in her story that Luthra and her team were giggling when Ghazala was narrating her encounters of sexual harassment.

That query remained unanswered, and all the journalists exited the courtroom. Minutes later, we get to know that the judge has recorded in his order that he requests media from making personal remarks about the lawyers involved in the present case.

It is still unclear whether the aforesaid 'request' is an operative part of the order or just a general observation. What constitutes 'personal remarks' still remains unclear and prone to varied interpretation.