Today's hearing in the plea filed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) against certain oral observations made by the Madras High Court and its reportage in the media saw the Supreme Court make pertinent oral observations on the role of the media and judicial accountability.

The ECI had raised strong objection to certain oral remarks made by the Madras High Court on April 26, whereby it had commented that the ECI should probably be put up for murder charges in view of its failure to curb the "wanton abuse" of COVID-19 protocol during election rallies.

The wide publication of the said comments prompted the ECI to move the Court. The matter was heard today by a Supreme Court Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah.

The following are highlights of today's hearing today.

1. In today's times, media cannot be told not to report on Court proceedings

"ECI is a seasoned constitutional body which has been entrusted with functions of conducting the elections. We cannot in today’s times say that media will not report the discussions that take place in Court," remarked Justice Chandrachud, in response to the ECI's prayer to restrain the media from reporting on oral observations made in Court.

2. Court's discussions are of public importance

"The discussions that take place are of importance...and are in public interest. It’s not a monologue that one person will speak and then judges will speak. We have an Indian pattern of arguments in Court...There is an aspect of the application of mind. First prayer of don't report what is said in court was far fetched," Justice Chandrachud said.

Justice MR Shah also weighed in on the discussion, commenting.

"When something is observed, it's in the larger public interest. They (Judges) are also humans and they are also stressed...Take this in the correct spirit," Justice Shah urged the ECI, in response to concerns that there were cases where the Court made comments unrelated to the order.

3. On long term perspective and impact on the functioning of High Courts

"We are looking at it from a wider constitutional perspective. Whoever is arguing is always in the dock and judges will always follow a line of questioning... We are looking at this from a long term...and impact on the functioning of High Courts. We don't want to demoralize our High Courts. they are vital pillars of our democracy. Things are often said in an open dialogue between Bar and Bench," Justice Chandrachud went on to remark.

He added, "What I am saying is not to belittle ECI. Democracy survives only when institutions are strengthened."

"Often something is said due to past experience or after a series of orders not being adhered to. Everything cannot be in order," Justice Shah weighed in.

4. On media's role in ensuring accountability

"We have to protect the judicial sanctity of the process. We have to make sure that High Court judges and Chief Justices are independent to make views. We have to make sure that media reports everything that happens in court so that we judges conduct proceedings with dignity," the Court went on to observe.

Justice Chandrachud added,

"The media should be able to report everything also to create accountability. Often the dialogue in court is to create an umbrella of discussion. High Courts are not district courts but have power under Article 226."

He further pointed out,

"Now you have electronic and social media. We are also conscious how we conduct. I am sure what are we saying is being reported now. But to contain what we want to ask or say in court just because of this will not do justice to the judicial process."

5. Take High Court's comments in the right spirit

The top court ultimately urged the ECI to take the Madras High Court's comments in the right spirit, while emphasising that the Court is aware of the how significant the ECI's role is.

"Please be rest assured that elections in our country has been a cornerstone of the existence of our democracy and we want all institutions to be free. When we write an order, don't think we are castigating ECI. We will bring balance. Issue is complex," the Court observed.

Justice Chandrachud went on to comment that judges cannot be asked to only "stick to pleadings" while hearing a case.

"We cant just say judges should stick to pleadings. They are overburdened and they are saying what's happening around them. They are burning the midnight oil," he remarked.

Justice Shah made a reference to how the Madras High Court's comments may not have been impromptu. As such, he urged the ECI to take the comments in the right spirit.

"High Court was considering orders and noted that orders were not followed. It was not impromptu. What is said is said. Take it in the right spirit," Justice Shah said.

Read a detailed account of today's hearing, as it happened: