The Supreme Court on Tuesday restrained the State of Punjab from initiating or continuing any coercive measures that could impede the publication of the Punjab Kesari newspaper, pending adjudication of the dispute by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi directed that the newspaper’s printing press be permitted to operate without interruption, subject to the final outcome of the proceedings before the High Court.
The Apex Court clarified that the interim protective arrangement would subsist until the pronouncement of the High Court’s judgment and for a further period of one week thereafter, in order to safeguard the parties’ right to pursue appellate remedies in accordance with law.
The interim order was passed following an urgent oral mention by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of the newspaper management. Terming the matter as exceptional and warranting immediate judicial intervention, Rohatgi contended that soon after the publication carried reports critical of the incumbent dispensation in the state, a series of allegedly punitive administrative actions were initiated against the management.
These measures were stated to include disconnection of electricity supply, issuance of notices by the Punjab Pollution Control Board under environmental regulatory statutes, closure of hospitality establishments owned by the group, registration of first information reports, and directions to suspend the functioning of the printing press, all within an unusually compressed timeframe.
The management asserted that the printing press, which had been operational for nearly two decades, was ordered to shut down on allegations of water pollution by invoking regulatory powers under pollution control legislation.
It was further submitted that although the Punjab and Haryana High Court had reserved judgment on the writ petition challenging the State’s actions, the absence of interim relief compelled the management to approach the Supreme Court by way of a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution.
Emphasis was placed on the settled constitutional principle that executive or regulatory authority could not be exercised to stifle the freedom of the press guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a), except within the narrow confines of the reasonable restrictions contemplated under Article 19(2).
Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General Shadan Farasat, appearing for the State of Punjab, defended the impugned measures as being strictly in compliance with statutory mandates, particularly those arising under pollution control and environmental protection laws. He argued that the High Court had already reserved judgment and that no further action was contemplated, while asserting that the regulatory directions were confined to a specific unit and did not amount to a blanket closure of the newspaper’s operations.
The Supreme Court recorded in its order that, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either side and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, the printing press of the Punjab Kesari newspaper should continue to function uninterruptedly. It further ordered the maintenance of the status quo in respect of other commercial establishments run by the management until the High Court delivered its judgment and for one additional week thereafter.
The post Supreme Court restrains coercive action against Punjab Kesari pending High Court verdict appeared first on India Legal.