Privileges issue with larger Bench

A two-judge Bench today referred the writ petitions of the Hindu journalists to the larger Bench in view of the importance of the question vis a vis the fundamental right to expression of the citizens.

Six journalists had been sentenced to two-week jail term by the Tamil Nadu Speaker for their writings.

The Bench comprising Justice YK Sabharwal and Justice BN Srikrishna also extended the stay on the arrest warrants issued by the Speaker. It allowed the Press Council of India and noted journalist Kuldip Nayar to implead in the case.

Meanwhile, the Bench also took up the case of 25 defamation cases filed against the Hindu journalists by the state government. They have challenged the validity of Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code which defines defamation.

According to them, the provision is violative of the right to freedom as it did not make any distinction between criticism made against a public personality in public spirit and those against ordinary citizens.

It also compelled the newspapers to first prove that the writings were not false, malafide and in public interest. However, the judges asked counsel to give case law studies on the issue and adjourned hearing on the petition till next Monday.

The Constitution has provided only temporary provisions regarding privileges of Parliament and state legislatures.

Until the relevant laws are passed, the British practice regarding privilege would continue. Neither Parliament nor any state legislature has found time to pass any law codifying privileges.

This has led to recurrent conflicts between the houses and the media. Several times in the past, the issue of privileges has been raised in the Supreme Court, arguing that the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression prevails over any supposed privileges of the house.

The court has not given any final answer to this strife so far.