CJI expresses anguish over RTI questions

Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia on Thursday expressed anguish over a spate of Right to Information applications seeking various information about him and other judges saying, "it is going beyond a limit".

The CJI's displeasure came during the hearing by a Constitution bench headed by him on the issue of laying down guidelines for media on covering court proceedings.

"In RTI (Right to Information) matter, I have given all disclosures except in certain areas.  Still questions are coming," he said and mentioned some of them, including invitations for lunch and his association with eminent jurist Nani Palkhivala.

"Different types of information are being sought. We have to save this institution of judiciary also and not only the press. We cannot accept all these. It is going beyond a limit. There should be some limit to all these," the CJI observed.

He said RTI law was "good" but there should be a limit as information was being sought about receiving invitations, attending lunches and the like.

Justice Kapadia was also pained by a news analysis on Thursday in a national daily on the Presidential Reference on the issues arising out of the judgement cancelling the 2G licences.

He said a reputed newspaper has done the analysis of the Presidential Reference which has not reached the apex court nor was even sub-judice and which will eventually come to the court at the end of the day.

"Will it not be an interference with the administration of justice when a matter is likely to come to the court," the CJI said and added that he was citing these examples without expressing his opinion whether they are right or wrong.

During the day-long deliberations on laying guidelines for media, the bench, also comprising Justices D K Jain, S S Nijjar, Ranjana Prakash Desai and J S Khehar, wanted to know what corrective measures were available with the media itself to deal with the concept of "paid news".

"Arguments have been put that there are various norms, guidelines and self regulation in media but what steps have been taken on the issue of paid news?" the bench asked when senior advocate Anil Divan was advancing arguments on behalf of 'The Hindu' daily.

"If the issue of paid news comes before the association or committee on media, what steps or penalty will be given if proved. What will happen we want to know," the bench further said.

However, the bench made clear that it was not against open hearings and the deliberations for guidelines should not be treated as adversarial.

Senior advocate T R Andhyarujina, who is assisting the court as amicus curiae, commenced his submissions saying any restriction of media will raise questions concerning the freedom of press.

He submitted that the contempt law was not primarily for punitive purposes but for keeping the administration of justice fair and proper.

The senior advocate said the question here is "how the court can ensure proper conduct of press relating to court proceedings" but there was difficulty in framing exhaustive guidelines.