MP High Court Holds News Editor Guilty Of Contempt For Publishing News Against Sitting Judge In 2011, Imposes ₹1 Lakh Cost

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held the editor of a Hindi newspaper in Gwalior, Suman Singh Sikarwar, guilty of Contempt of Court for publishing a scandalising news report against one of its sitting judges in 2011.

The Court imposed a fine of ₹2,000 on Sikarwar, along with a cost of ₹1 lakh to be paid to the M.P. High Court Bar Association within one month.

The division bench comprising Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke said the Editor deliberately made comments about a particular judge and the same was not in the nature of mere "dispassionate criticism".

The contempt petition (criminal) was initiated over a news item titled “Sarvoch Nayalaya Aaj Ki Tarah Nishpakch ho jai to Judge Shri Mody Ji Ko Jail Mein Hona Tha” in Dainik Chambal Vani, casting aspersions on the judge. The news levelled allegations of corruption and abuse of power within the judiciary, particularly a sitting judge

Court noted the Editor in his replies and affidavit had even tried to justify the said news items. It said,

“From the very appearance of the respondent-contemnor before this court, it appears from his attitude that there is no repentance of any kind on his face and just for the sake of apology he had made a regretful acknowledgment of the offence, which appears to this court not bona fide. The aforesaid act of seeking apology appears to be just for the sake of it, as he had glued himself with the allegations leveled against the then sitting judge/judges of the High Court and had tried to justify his stand, the regret which respondent-contemnor had shown are just in words and not imbibed in his deeds.”

Expounding on the provisions of Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, the Court observed that the news item appeared to scandalize the image of the then-sitting Judge Shri Mody and the functioning of this Court.

Thus, the Court held that he was liable to be punished under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

On being asked to address the quantum of punishment to be awarded to him, the contemnor sought to withdraw his pleadings with regard to merits of the reply. However, the Court observed,

“As he has already been held guilty of criminal contempt as defined u/s. 2 (c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the language which is used by him in his reply, additional reply and affidavits and the allegations leveled against the Hon'ble Judges in the news items repeatedly despite various warnings having been given to him, coupled with the fact that he had not even bothered to tender any written unconditional apology before this Court even at this stage, therefore, this Court while exercising powers under Article 215 of the Constitution deems it appropriate to impose punishment upon him.”

Accordingly, the court disposed of the plea. 

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 101

Click Here To Read Judgement