Probing Postponement Orders: Judiciary's Latest Attemt to Square The Circle in The Media Versus The Fair Trail Debate

Abstract

The relationship between the "a .< id the judiciary is a complex one, sometimes operating in unison, while at times being completely at loggerheads, vying against one another in terms of meeting public expectations. Trial by media has always earned the ire of the judiciary worldwide for being intrusive in the course of delivering justice. This paper canvasses the judicial measures that have been devised in USA, UK, EU and Canada to counter this vice. Treading on these footsteps, the Indian approach has also permitted issuance of prior restraint orders, pre-censorship orders and postponement orders in the recent landmark judgment of Sahara India Real Estate Corporation htd. v SEBI, which certainly merits an academic comment. Being. a fetter on the crucial fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression, the verdict has rekindled the constitutional debate between free speech and fair trial once again. This article makes an objective effort to examine the justifications put forth by tk judiciary while curtailing the media's freedom of expression rights and the right U know of the citizens. It winds up by opining that the current legal framewift on .urtailing media freedom is already replete with post facto measures like contempt prr,ceedings and it does not require to be further supplemented by ex-ante measures as 'vmced by the recent Sahara ruling.