I am clear in my mind that criticizing any judgement is no contempt.

It becomes contempt only if you ridicule the judgement, or if you do anything which reduces image of courts in eyes of people, or if you attribute inefficiency or lack of Integrity to Judge.

Without transgression of above limits, I want to question, recent judgement of a High Court which prevents media from reporting of movement of army troops.

Judges are Always right. But they can often be misled, if lawyers fail to project complete legal aspects of a case.

WHAT ARE ADMITTED AN UNDENIABLE FACTS?


1) There is No Emergency in India. There is no suspension of fundamental rights of people to express their views.


2) There is no denying of the fact that on January 16, the army troops did make some movement without informing concerned office. Army says that that since these were routine transfers. No need to inform or to seek permission. Government has not denied that these were routine transfer of troops.(as I understand)


This is all the Whole debate is about.


HOW FAR THE JUDGEMENT IS BASED ON SOUND PRINCIPLES OF LAW?


If reporting of Times of India, dated 11 April,2012, page 13 is correct, then two reasons apear to have been given by Hon’ble Judges:


Reason 1: “This is not a matter which require public discussion at the cost of security of country.
I want you to focus on word underlined above. I will try to explain weakness flowing from this words.

Reason 2:  “We think it appropriate to direct, certain government officers to see that electronic and print media to not report /release any news relating to subject matter, i.e. movement of troops. Again focus on the underlined words. The weakness flows from there.


The judgement may have given more detailed and more well reasons. But here we are just analysing a News Report About A Judgement, not the judgement itself. 


WEAKNESSES IN THESE TWO REASONS:


WEAKNESS No. 1) Regarding Reason No.1 and No.2.


 Lord Denning in his book “The Discipline of Law” (Must read by every law student), cited a number of precedents and said that phrases like, “IF IT APPEARS TO MINISTER…” and “IF THE MINISTER IS SATISFIED…” are not good statements in eyes of law.

It judgement we are discussing, the underlined phrases above, which are commonly used by most judges, are not good statements of law, as I understand. Wherever, I read this phrases in any judgement of Supreme Court or High Court, I mark that judgement as “Weak“

WEAKNESS NO. 2) About Implementation of an Order of Court.


A court order can be implemented only if it is (1) Clear – if it is not clear, about a person against whom order is issued, it is vague. If it is issued generally to several persons, like home secretary, IB, etc etc. It is always impossible to punish anyone or all, if order disobeyed or ignored. It undermines rule of law.


WEAKNESS No. 3) Very few judges are aware that we have now become a GLOBAL VILLAGE.
The old concepts of territorial jurisdictions have gone. If a man sitting in Canada,  discusses movement of troops in India on his blog, how any action can be taken against that man who is subject only to Canadian laws and not by any Inidan Laws.


If the news report of Times of India is correct, the judgement prohibits only reporting and releasing news. It does not prohibit reading of news published in Canada and viewed in U.P. by an Indian.


For these three reasons, I consider that the Judgement is a WEAK judgement.
And it may be set aside by Supreme Court if any media house challenges it in Supreme Court.


AN IMPORTANT NOTE: 


In an earlier blog, I have told you that it is possible to criticize a Judgement of High Court or Supreme Court, without committing contempt and without displeasing concerned judges.


Well, this article is one such example to explore better methods of criticising judgements of High Courts and Supreme Courts without displeasing Judges.


Those of you readers, who may be law students, lawyers and former judges are welcome to correct me if my views are wrong.


ANOTHER IMPORTANT NOTE:


Why I am the only Supreme Court’s small lawyer who is analysing judgements of courts?
Where have all Senior Advocates of Supreme Court gone?


Haresh Raichura
11/4/2012 10.15AM