The five-judge Constitution Bench took objection to Dhavan's complaint saying the deliberations on the issue were "not suo motu" but was on an application filed by senior advocate Fali Nariman on behalf of the Sahara Group.
Dhavan had raised the objection when advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for Youth for Equality (YFE) -- a socio-political organisation -- was supporting the apex court's endeavour for framing guidelines by pointing out how the media, particularly the vernacular press, have been giving a go bye to the restrictions imposed under the Constitution.
"Weighty questions concerning Article 19 (Freedom of Speech and Expression) and Article 21 (Right to life and liberty) have to be answered. But the arguments have sprawled and are travelling in several directions....When it is a suo motu proceeding.
"These arguments are troubling the media," Dhavan told bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia.
However, the bench, which took objection to his interruption of the proceedings, said it had clarified on the first day of commencement of hearing that the deliberations for framing guidelines were initiated after an application was filed.