Freedom of the Press and Court Reporting

Article 19(1)(a) guarantees citizens freedom of speech and expression. Although it does not separately mention the press, this freedom includes the freedom of the press to gather, publish and communicate information about judicial proceedings, subject to lawful restrictions.

Constitutional protection

Court reporting advances the principle of open justice by enabling public scrutiny of courts and informing citizens about the administration of justice. The press has no special constitutional privilege beyond Article 19(1)(a), but its right to publish cannot be curtailed merely because the expression appears in print, broadcast or digital form.

• In Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra (1966), the Supreme Court recognized that public trials and publication of court proceedings ordinarily support public confidence in judicial administration.
• In Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India (2018), the Court connected access to judicial proceedings with open justice and permitted live-streaming in appropriate cases, subject to safeguards.

Limits on court reporting

The freedom is not absolute. Under Article 19(2), reasonable restrictions may be imposed by law on grounds relevant to court reporting, particularly contempt of court, defamation, decency or morality, and maintenance of public order.

• Courts may conduct proceedings in camera or restrict publication where this is legally necessary to protect a fair trial, privacy, vulnerable participants or the administration of justice.
• In Sahara India Real Estate Corporation v. SEBI (2012), the Supreme Court permitted temporary postponement orders when publication creates a real and substantial risk to a fair trial, subject to necessity and proportionality.
• Articles 129 and 215 empower the Supreme Court and High Courts respectively to punish for contempt of themselves.

Protection for fair and accurate reports

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 balances press freedom with judicial integrity. Section 4 provides that publishing a fair and accurate report of a judicial proceeding, or any stage of it, is not contempt, while Section 7 gives qualified protection regarding proceedings held in chambers or in camera.

• Protection does not extend to distorted reporting, disobedience of a lawful publication restriction, or material that independently amounts to contempt or another punishable wrong.