Karnataka High Court fines The New Indian Express Rs.10 lakh for irresponsible reporting, sparking ethics debate. Justice NS Sanjay Gowda criticizes publication for disclosing sensitive information without party response.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
BENGALURU: Recently, The Karnataka High Court imposed a significant fine of Rs.10 lakh on The New Indian Express for what was deemed as irresponsible reporting regarding an inquiry into allegations against a senior judicial officer. This considerable discourse on journalistic ethics and privacy rights, ultimately resulting in the High Court’s dismissal of charges against the implicated judge.
Justice NS Sanjay Gowda, presiding over the matter, criticized the publication for its handling of the sensitive information.
He highlighted that “the articles of charge against the judge ought not to have been mentioned,” especially since “the identity of the persons alleged to have been in an improper relationship should not have been published,” given that neither party had been given a chance to respond.
The controversy began when The New Indian Express published details of an inquiry implicating a retired senior judicial officer in allegations of infidelity and financial misconduct. Despite the inquiry’s findings, which resulted in six charges with only four being substantiated, the newspaper failed to report that these findings were not endorsed by the High Court’s Administrative Committee.
ALSO READ:Karnataka High Court Judges Receive Threatening Calls| Scammers ‘New Target’
Justice Gowda’s order further elaborated on the consequences of such reporting, stating:
“The charges, if considered in isolation, could imply that an improper relationship was an established fact. This would violate their privacy and significantly impact their character, effectively condemning them without a fair hearing.”
The court’s criticism extended beyond factual misrepresentation, addressing the failure to uphold journalistic standards.
“They have proceeded to publish the article, which would indicate that the newspaper was already reporting as though the charges against the petitioner had already been established,”
-the court observed.
The judgment also lamented the omission of critical information, namely the Administrative Committee’s rejection of the inquiry report, a detail that significantly alters the narrative.
The High Court’s decision to drop the charges against the judge came after a full-court review, a fact that was conspicuously absent from the newspaper’s coverage. This oversight led the court to question the integrity of the reporting, stating:
“This aspect of the refusal of the Administrative Committee to accept the inquiry report obviously had an enormous bearing on the entire issue, but this crucial information was not at all covered by the newspaper.”
Condemning the New Indian Express for a “manner unbecoming of a responsible newspaper.” The judgment emphasized the need for media outlets to uphold the highest standards of reporting, especially when dealing with matters of such sensitive nature.
The court’s directive for the newspaper to pay the fine to the Karnataka Legal Services Authority within two months serves as a stern reminder of the responsibilities that come with journalistic freedom.
Additionally, the High Court has called for an internal inquiry to ascertain how the confidential report was leaked to the press, indicating the seriousness with which it views the breach of privacy and procedural norms.
ALSO READ: Karnataka vs. Tamil Nadu||Supreme Court Decision on ‘Cauvery River Water’ Dispute
Representatives from both sides, including Advocate K Govindaraj for the New Indian Express Group and Senior Advocates Udaya Holla, Vivek Holla, G Krishnamurthy, along with Advocates GK Bhavana and MN Umashankar for the High Court and the respondent judges.
