It is not a court's duty to tell media to delete or take down content: SC
The Supreme Court, in a judgment, on Friday (May 9, 2025) held that it is not the duty of courts to instruct the media to delete or take down content.
The verdict by a Bench of Justices A.S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan came in a challenge to a Delhi High Court order directing the takedown or deletion of online content related to a defamation case between news agency, Asian News International, and Wikimedia Foundation and comments allegedly made by the Single Judge of the High Court hearing the dispute.
A Division Bench of the High Court had given Wikimedia 36 hours to take down the online pages hosted on its platform. The Division Bench order of October 16 last year prima facie decided that the content bordered on contempt and amounted to interference in court proceedings and violation of the sub-judice principle by a party to the defamation proceedings.
The apex court judgment, authored by Justice Bhuyan, found the direction to take down the content 'disproportionate'.
'We have no hesitation in our mind that such directions could not have been issued,' Justice Bhuyan concluded, setting aside the takedown order.
Justice Bhuyan said courts must not be seen to regulate or stifle the freedom of speech and expression.
'It is not the duty of the court to tell the media: delete this, take that down… Both the judiciary and the media are the foundational pillars of democracy which is a basic feature of our Constitution. For a liberal democracy to thrive, both must supplement each other,' Justice Bhuyan observed.
On ANI's defamation suit against Wikipedia | Explained
The judgment said introspection and robust debate were essential for the improvement of institutions, including the judiciary.
'Courts, as a public and open institution, must always remain open to public observations, debates and criticisms. In fact, courts should welcome debates and constructive criticism,' Justice Bhuyan wrote.
Media can vigorously debate on sub judice or ongoing proceedings. However, criticism must be objective and constructive. The apex court reminded that judges have no means to respond publicly to personal criticism. A case of contempt would be made out if a publication scandalised the court or its judges.
The judgment said a court could opt for an order of preventive injunction against the Press only if there was reasonable ground to believe that publication would impair the administration of justice or the right to fair trial. The danger apprehended should be imminent and real.
People at large have a right to know. The court must not obstruct this basic right of the people in a free country. Injunction on publishing matters relating to cases which are sub judice must be ordered only if it interfered with the due course of justice, Justice Bhuyan noted.
Similarly, courts can order the postponement of an article only when necessary to prevent real and substantial risk to the fairness of the court proceedings. The court must keep in mind the important public role of the media in a democracy and subject a postponement order to the twin tests of necessity and proportionality. A postponement order should operate only for a limited period and without disturbing the content of the publication. The media has a right to challenge a postponement order in a higher court.
A 'postponement order' is not a punitive measure. It is a balancing measure… A postponement order is a neutralising device evolved by the courts to balance interests of equal weightage, that is, freedom of expression vis-a-vis freedom of trial,' Justice Bhuyan explained.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
SC seeks Karnataka govt's response to plea over non-release of 'Thug Life' in State theatres
New Delhi [India], June 13 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Friday sought the Karnataka government's response to a plea seeking protection from threats against the screening of Kamal Haasan's film 'Thug Life'. Considering the urgency of the matter, a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan issued notices to the Karnataka government, the State police, Raaj Kamal Films International Private Limited and the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) seeking their responses to the plea. During the hearing, the counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no action has been taken by the state authorities in Karnataka despite violent threats being issued against linguistic minorities in the State. 'No FIR has been registered. They have joined hands with extremist elements', advocate A Velan stated. After hearing the matter, the Court sought the responses of the aforesaid authorities and listed the matter to be heard next week. On Monday, the top court had refused to urgently hear Reddy's plea and had asked the petitioner to approach the concerned High Court. Subsequently, the matter was listed before the top court to be heard today (Friday). During the hearing on Monday, counsel appearing for the petitioner stated that a law-and-order situation is arising in the State, as cinema halls are receiving threats from certain fringe elements. Further, the counsel had stated that threats are being issued that the theatres will be set on fire. Hence, theatres in the State sought protection from the top court. The issue arose over an alleged statement recently made by actor Kamal Hassan, which said 'Kannada was born out of Tamil'. As per the petitioners' plea, there is an effective ban on the CBFC-certified film Thug Life in Karnataka, which is caused by violent threats from private groups, and the state authorities have failed to take action in this regard. The plea argued that such inaction violates the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. This right applies not only to filmmakers but also to the public who want to view films. The top court will hear the matter next week. (ANI)
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
WBSSC job case: Calcutta HC reserves verdict on petition challenging Bengal govt stipend for non-teaching staff
Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court on Friday concluded the hearing on a petition challenging the West Bengal government notification for a monthly stipend to be paid to non-teaching staff, under Group-C and Group-D categories, who lost their jobs in state-run schools in the state following a Supreme Court order, and reserved its verdict. The counsels for both the petitioners and the state government submitted their closing remarks before the single-judge bench of Justice Amrita Sinha, who then reserved the judgment. The state government counsel, in his closing remarks, questioned the interest of the petitioners in blocking the stipend for the job-losing non-teaching staff. The counsel for the petitioner, in his counter-argument, claimed that since the stipend is being paid from the state government exchequer constituted by public money, anyone has the right to seek justification behind how that money is spent. During the previous hearing in the matter on June 9, Justice Sinha raised questions on the basis of the calculations on which stipend amounts for Group-C and Group-D staff were determined. At the same time, she also questioned whether there had been instances in the past of the state government paying stipends to job-losing state government employees. She also questioned what the state government would get in return from those job-losing non-teaching staff against the stipend paid to them. Last month, the West Bengal government issued a notification announcing the new scheme under the state Labour Department. Under the "West Bengal Livelihood and Special Security Interim Scheme', the job-losing Group-C staff would be entitled to a monthly stipend of Rs 25,000, while those in the Group D category would be entitled to Rs 20,000 monthly. Announcing the launch of the scheme, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said that the scheme was planned under the state Labour Department because of the tendencies of some people and vested interests to file public interest litigations at the Calcutta High Court against any decision of the state government. However, with three successive petitions being filed at the Calcutta High Court, the state government's desire to avoid a legal battle over the scheme was not fulfilled. On April 3, the Supreme Court upheld the Calcutta High Court order that annulled 25,753 school appointments made through the WBSSC, observing that the panel had to be scrapped entirely due to the authorities' failure to distinguish between "tainted" and "untainted" candidates. The state government and the WBSSC have since filed review petitions in the Supreme Court seeking reconsideration of the order.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Trump asks half a million people from THESE countries to 'self-deport' immediately amid immigration crackdown
The Trump administration has directed as many as 530,000 immigrants who came to the U.S. legally to 'self-deport'. The crucial move comes as it has revoked protections granted to Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans by a Biden-era program, reports HuffPost. The Trump administration has stared sending termination notices to more than 500,000 foreign nationals who had received temporary stays to live and work in the United States under a special humanitarian exception. The so-called CHNV program was open to applicants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela from 2023 until it was terminated by President Donald Trump earlier this year. ALSO READ: Trump calls Israel's strike on Iran 'excellent', says 'there's more to come' by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like La calculadora muestra el valor de su casa al instante Calculadora de Valor de Casa | Anuncios de Búsqueda Undo Trump asks half a million people to leave US The Trump administration has put into action a plan to order 500,000 foreign nationals to self-deport from America immediately. Recipients of the notices from the Department of Homeland Security are encouraged to 'self-deport immediately.' Those who will co-operate with the Department of Homeland Security will receive a cash bonus of $1,000 when they return to their home country. Live Events The Biden administration in 2023 granted the immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela " humanitarian parole " into the US under a scheme dubbed the CHNV program. It aimed to protect people from extreme living conditions in those four countries Now, the Trump administration has sent them notices via email, informing that their temporary permission to remain in the US under the CHNV parole program has been rescinded. Migrants who have not secured another lawful immigration status are now being told they must leave the country right away. ALSO READ: Tropical storm Dalila might form within 48 hours as Eastern Pacific hurricane season sees active start. Check map According to Department of Homeland Security, of November last year, 531,670 people had been granted permission to stay in the U.S under the program. The DHS began sending documents out on Thursday, two weeks after the Supreme Court ruled the administration could force those in the CHNV program to leave the country. A legal challenge against Trump's dismantling of Biden-era parole programs is still ongoing. "Starting in 2022, the Biden administration released over 500,000 poorly vetted aliens into the U.S. under the CHNV parole program. President Trump canceled this program, and the Supreme Court upheld this cancellation on May 30, 2025. DHS is now notifying parole recipients if they have not obtained lawful status to remain in the U.S., they must leave immediately," the agency said in a press release. A month ago, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to revoke the protected status of nearly 350,000 more immigrants, all from Venezuela, who were allowed to remain in the U.S. under the Temporary Status Program. However, even as the Department of Homeland Security issued notices to foreign nationals on Thursday, Trump expressed concern over how his administration's tough immigration enforcement was negatively impacting the farming, hotel, and leisure industries — sectors that often rely on undocumented labor. ALSO READ: Kim Kardashian's post on ICE raids draws DHS ire: 'Which one of these convicted child molesters would you like to stay?' 'Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long term workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Thursday morning. 'In many cases the Criminals allowed into our Country by the VERY Stupid Biden Open Borders Policy are applying for those jobs,' Trump wrote. 'This is no good. We must protect our Farmers, but get the CRIMINALS OUT OF THE USA,' he wrote. 'Changes are coming!' Speaking to reporters later, Trump reiterated his belief that farmers were being harmed by his administration's deportation regime. 'Farmers are being hurt badly ... They have very good workers, they've worked for them for 20 years, they're not citizens but they've turned out to be great,' Trump said. ALSO READ: Is Pentagon planning to invade Greenland and Panama? Pete Hegseth's remarks raise serious concerns 'We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back,' he said, an apparent reference to the deportation of undocumented agricultural workers that his administration has pursued. 'You go into a farm and you look and people ... they've been there for 20, 25, years, and they've worked great and the owner of the farm loves them and everything else,' Trump continued. 'And then you're supposed to throw them out.' 'So we're, we're going to have an order on that, pretty soon, I think. We can't do that to our farmers and leisure too, hotels,' the president said.
