Media must be mindful of harm to litigants while reporting oral remarks by judges: Kerala High Court in Priya Varghese case

The Kerala High Court on Thursday urged the media to exercise caution while reporting on court matters, especially oral remarks made by judges during the hearing of cases [Priya Varghese v Dr. Joseph Skariah & Ors.]..A division bench of Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Mohammed Nias said that the press must be mindful of the harm that unjustified comments by media, often based on oral remarks of judges, could cause to litigants."On its part, the media cannot be unmindful of the harm that is caused to a litigant’s dignity and reputation through unjustified comments and remarks, often based on the oral remarks made by a judge during the adjudication proceedings, notwithstanding that the litigant ultimately succeeds in those proceedings" the Court stated..The bench highlighted that courts and even the Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud have been requesting the print and electronic media to exercise restraint by deferring discussions on matters pending before the court so that the rule of law can be better served..The bench also opined that the right to privacy, which has been recognised as a fundamental right, includes protection from actions of other private citizens including the press."On account of its nature as a right that is personal to an individual, we are of the view that the newly recognised fundamental right to privacy, which takes within its fold the right to protection of one’s reputation as well, would merit classification as a fundamental right that protects an individual, not only against arbitrary State action, but also against the actions of other private citizens, such as the press or media. We trust, therefore, that the media will take note of these observations and adopt a code of responsible journalistic conduct that will inform news reporting in the days to come" the bench said in its judgment.It, therefore, urged media to adopt a code of responsible journalistic conduct while reporting the news..The division bench's observations came on an appeal moved by one, Priya Varghese against the order of a single-judge that had directed the Kannur University to re-examine her credentials to be appointed as an Associate Professor..The case had garnered much media attention as Varghese is married to KK Ragesh, who is the private secretary to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan. In November last year, a single-judge had held that Varghese does not have the requisite teaching experience to be appointed to the post. That judgment was passed on a petition moved by Dr. Joseph Skariah, who was ranked after Varghese in the rank list of candidates for the post.Subsequently, Varghese moved the present appeal challenging the order.The division bench, citing the provisions of the UGC Regulations of 2018, held that the period spent by Varghese in pursuing her PhD under the faculty development program could not be excluded while estimating her teaching experience. The bench further held that the period spent by Varghese on deputation as the Director of Student Services/Programme Coordinator of the National Service Scheme of Kannur University would count towards her teaching experience as well."In our view, the answer to the question as to whether or not the experience gained by a teacher, while on deputation to a non-teaching post, qualifies as teaching experience must depend upon the nature of activities undertaken by the teacher in the post to which she is deputed and not merely by the classification – as teaching or non-teaching – accorded to the post," the Court stated.Consequently, the bench set aside the order of the single-judge and directed that her candidature for the post of Associate Professor be considered accordingly..Before concluding the judgment, however, the bench deemed it necessary to make a few observations about the media attention that the case received while it was being adjudicated before the single-judge."Frighteningly frequent are those occasions when the impugned decision in academic matters attracts media attention for some reason or the other, and the court has then to deal with the added distraction brought about through incessant newspaper/channel discussions and overwhelming social media posts," the bench said. Pointing out that it not only harms the adjudication process but the rights of the litigants as well, the bench called for the media to be more responsible while covering the proceedings in such cases. .Senior Advocate Renjith Thampan, instructed by advocate Arun Kumar, appeared on behalf of Varghese. Senior Advocate George Poonthottam and advocate Santharam P appeared for Dr. Skariah. Senior Advocate P Ravindran and advocate IV Pramod appeared for the University registrar. Senior Advocate S Gopakumaran Nair appeared for the Chancellor of Universities in Kerala.Senior Government Pleader TB Hood appeared for the State and advocate S Krishnamoorthy appeared for the University Grants Commission..[Read Judgment]