The Delhi High Court has condemned the disturbing trend of media sensationalizing harmless courtroom remarks, urging journalists to act responsibly and ensure accuracy in legal reporting to prevent misleading the public and undermining judicial integrity.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has raised concern over the increasing trend of media outlets sensationalizing innocuous remarks made during court hearings.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while hearing a case related to businessman Shravan Gupta (an accused in the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper scam), said that media organizations must exercise “absolute responsibility” in court reporting and avoid misrepresenting judicial observations.
Justice Krishna observed that it has become a disturbing trend for certain media houses to publish even the most casual comments made by judges during hearings, remarks that may not be connected to the case’s merits, simply to generate public curiosity or sensational headlines.
“Such reporting of the court proceedings, which may generate curiosity of public to read with more interest, is accepted without realizing that such remarks are not part of the proceedings or do not pertain to the merits of the case, and need no prominence or even reporting,”
the Court stated.
Case Background
The remarks came in the case titled Shravan Gupta v. Directorate of Enforcement, where Gupta had challenged non-bailable warrants (NBW) issued against him in a money laundering investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).
On July 16, the Delhi High Court had reserved its verdict in Gupta’s plea. However, the following day, several media outlets, including CNN News18, The Tribune, The Times Group, Law Trend, Indian Express, and CSR Journal, published reports claiming that the Court had criticized Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa, describing his conduct as “unbecoming of a Senior Advocate.”
Court’s Observation
Justice Krishna clarified that the Court’s remark was a general observation regarding repeated adjournments by lawyers and was not specifically directed at Vikas Pahwa.
“To falsely claim that the remark was specifically directed towards Pahwa is not only incorrect but essentially designed to create a sensational news story of interest to the public at large,”
the Court said.
Pahwa had moved an application seeking action against what he termed defamatory and false media reports, pointing out that the alleged statement did not form part of any judicial order.
Emphasizing the impact of media on public perception, Justice Krishna noted that most citizens rely on journalists for updates on court proceedings and therefore expect accuracy and fairness.
“The media has the absolute responsibility for accuracy and fairness in media reporting,”
the Court observed, while refraining from issuing any formal directions to the news outlets.
Instead, Justice Krishna urged media houses to introspect and decide whether such reporting practices should continue, stating that journalists with professional expertise “need no guidance from the Court” to distinguish what is relevant to proceedings and what is not.
Ultimately, the Delhi High Court dismissed Shravan Gupta’s plea challenging the non-bailable warrants, while using the occasion to underscore the ethical responsibilities of the press in judicial coverage.
Appearance:
Shravan Gupta: Senior Advocates Vikas Pahwa and Tanvir Ahmed Mir with Advocates Yudhister Singh, Prabhav Ralli, Saud Khan, Shiv Kapoor and Pulkit Shree
The ED: Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, Panel Counsel Vivek Gurnani as well as Advocates Kanishk Maurya and Kunal Kochar
Case Title:
Shravan Gupta v Directorate of Enforcement
CRL.M.C. 449/2021 & CRL.M.A. 20618/2025
READ JUDGMENT
