The Supreme Court has admitted The Indian Express' appeal challenging the Gujarat High Court’s refusal to accept its affidavit of apology over alleged misreporting of court proceedings. The matter was tagged with a similar petition filed by Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd., as the Apex Court underscored the importance of maintaining judicial decorum in media-issued apologies.
The case originates from a controversy that unfolded last year when the Gujarat High Court took exception to news articles published by the Times of India, Indian Express, and Divya Bhaskar. These articles, based on a court hearing regarding amendments to the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Act, allegedly misrepresented the Court’s oral observations as if they were its final conclusions. On August 13, 2023, the High Court, comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi, issued notices to the publications, calling for their explanation and later directing the newspapers to publish formal apologies.
On September 2, 2023, the High Court expressed dissatisfaction with the manner in which the public apologies had been issued. The bench noted that the apologies published by the newspapers on August 23 lacked clarity and failed to specify that the statements being retracted pertained to a misreporting of judicial proceedings. The Court emphasised that the apologies appeared inadequate, vague, and misleading in the absence of a direct reference to the specific report in question.
Counsel for the newspapers submitted that the public apologies were linked to the date and title of the original articles and had been published as per the Court’s directions. However, the Chief Justice strongly disagreed, remarking that the apologies read more like a formality than a genuine act of remorse. The Court observed, “You should have given it a complete headline that apology is in relation to what. Who is going to understand what is the apology for? Apology for reporting a wrong report, it should come and the report should have been there with this apology. How will people relate to that? Some people may have read that item (August 13 report) and some maybe reading this apology.”
Further criticising the tone and format of the apologies, the Chief Justice stated, “This is not the way a newspaper tenders an apology for reporting a wrong news item. It should be related to the news item... It is not the way the apology is tendered. When you are creating a sensational news then it is so huge letters, bold letters with some catch words, catchphrases, middle... where is the remorse? It is not an unconditional apology. It is only an eyewash. Same language in both newspapers. Both editors have tendered apology in the same language.” Subsequently, the High Court granted three days’ time to the newspapers to issue a revised public apology in bold letters on the front page, clearly acknowledging the incorrect reporting.
The Indian Express later approached the Supreme Court, challenging the Gujarat High Court’s refusal to accept its affidavit of apology and its directive to file a revised one. The matter was heard by a bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih, granted leave and directed that the matter be tagged with the earlier special leave petition filed by Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. The bench also noted that proceedings before the High Court concerning the amendments to the Gujarat Education Act may continue independently.
In conclusion, the Top Court has now kept the matter alive for further scrutiny, having stayed the High Court’s order requiring revised apologies in the earlier petition and extending the same relief to Indian Express, pending final adjudication.
Picture Source :
