Supreme Court stays gag order on Bar & Bench from reporting appointment of Rajasthan AAG

The Supreme Court today stayed an order of the Rajasthan High Court which had imposed gag on Bar & Bench and other print and electronic media from reporting on the controversy surrounding the appointment of Rajasthan Additional Advocate General Abhinav Sharma..A Bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta today heard the appeal filed by Editor Pallavi Saluja and Correspondent Meera Emmanuel, before issuing notice to Sharma and staying the November 3 order of the High Court..Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and R Basant appeared for the petitioners, along with advocates A Karthik, MF Philip and N Sai Vinod..Sibal, appearing for the petitioners, told the Bench that the High Court had ordered a blanket ban on the media, which was “completely unacceptable”..The Bench proceeded to issue notice returnable in three weeks..Bar & Bench had earlier reported that the Rajasthan High Court had issued notice in a petition challenging the appointment of Additional Advocate General (AAG) Abhinav Sharma..Appointment of AAG challenged (again) in Rajasthan HC.In the petition filed by Advocate Sunil Samdaria in the Rajasthan High Court,it has been contended that Sharma’s April 2018 appointment as AAG is violative of the Rajasthan Law and Legal Affairs Departmental Manual, 1999, the Litigation Policy of 2011, the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v Brijeshwar Singh Chahal, as well as Abhinav Sharma’s personal undertaking before the Supreme Court in 2015..Sharma had initially been appointed an AAG in January 2014. However, in view of three criminal cases pending against him, Samdaria challenged this appointment before the Rajasthan High Court the same year..In April 2015, the High Court quashed Sharma’s 2014 appointment as AAG on grounds of an absence of personal integrity and lack of effective consultation prior to the challenged appointment, which served to vitiate the same for having compromised the institutional integrity of the AAG’s office..Whereas a Special Leave Petition was filed challenging this verdict, Sharma eventually undertook to demit the office of AAG before the Supreme Court. This, Samdaria contends, also points towards Sharma’s implied acceptance of the High Court’s 2015 decision disqualifying him from appointment as AAG..The Supreme Court’s order mentions that the appeals were “allowed”, and the case was disposed of only in view of Sharma’s undertaking that he would voluntarily give up the office of AAG. As noted in the Court’s order, nothing survived to adjudicate once Sharma resigned from the AAG’s office..Consequently, the Rajasthan government accepted Sharma’s resignation in June 2015, effective from May that year..However, in April this year, the Rajasthan government again notified the appointment of Sharma as an AAG, presumably on the premise that he has been discharged in certain criminal proceedings..On the other hand, Samdaria contends that this was an erroneous decision, arguing that it was made ignoring certain criminal proceedings still pending against Sharma. The Bench of Justices Mohammad Rafiq and Goverdhan Bardhar subsequently issued notice in Samdaria’s petition..After Bar & Bench had reported on the same, Sharma had approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking a gag on reportage surrounding his appointment. This application came up before another Division Bench presided by Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog. This Division Bench allowed Sharma’s application and directed Bar & Bench to pull down the story. This prompted Bar & Bench to approach the Supreme Court in appeal..Read the order below.

Supreme Court stays gag order on Bar & Bench from reporting appointment of Rajasthan AAG

Related Stories