Opinion of the Supreme Court to the Secretary of the Assembly of Maharashtra for warning Arnab Goswami


Supreme Court Sends Show Cause Notice to Maharashtra Assembly Secretary for Letter to Arnab Goswami

New Delhi:

The Supreme Court today issued a show cause notice to the secretary of the legislature of Maharashtra asking him to explain in two weeks why contempt proceedings should not be brought against him for his letter to journalist Arnab Goswami on warning against disclosure of the home notification. Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court, which also granted protection from arrest to Arnab Goswami in the Maharashtra Assembly violation of privilege motion case, took note of the October 13 letter from the secretary of the assembly. and declared that he had committed his contempt at first sight.

A bench led by Chief Justice SA Bobde expressed anger when senior lawyer Harish Salve, appearing for Arnab Goswami, referred to the contents of the letter from Maharashtra’s secretary of the Assembly to Arnab Goswami.

The bench said it was “surprised” that the officer in question wrote such a letter stating that the assembly proceedings were confidential and should not have been disclosed.

“This is a serious matter and amounts to contempt. The above statements are unprecedented and tend to bring the administration of justice into disrepute and may in any event constitute direct interference in the administration of justice.”

“The intention of the author of the letter appears to be to intimidate the petitioner for approaching this tribunal and threatening him with a sanction for doing so,” said the bench, including also judges AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian, during the proceedings held. by videoconference.

“We are therefore issuing a notice to defendant # 2 (secretary of the assembly) as to why he should not be punished for contempt of court in the exercise of power under Article 129 of the Constitution of the India, “he ordered.

Referring to the wording of the letter, the Supreme Court said that the Secretary of the Assembly “would have been well advised to understand that the right to address this court under Article 32 of the Constitution of the ‘India in itself is a fundamental right.

He said there was no doubt that if a citizen were in any way dissuaded from approaching this tribunal in the exercise of their right under section 32, it “would constitute a serious interference with the law. administration of justice in the country “.

The Supreme Court has taken due note of the fact that the Secretary of the Assembly, who was served with the plea of ​​Arnab Goswami, chose to write the letter to the journalist warning him against disclosing the notification. from home to the upper court instead of appearing.

“We find that although the Respondent was served … instead of appearing, they sent a letter in question to the petitioner,” said Bench.


The Supreme Court, in its order, also noted that lead lawyer Abhishek M Singhvi, appearing for Maharashtra, expressed his inability to “explain or justify the contents” of the letter from the secretary of the assembly to Arnab Goswami.

He also appointed lead counsel Arvind Datar as amicus curiae to assist him in the case.

The Supreme Court heard the plea of ​​journalist Arnab Goswami against the notice of justification by the Legislative Assembly of Maharashtra for having initiated a request for breach of privilege against him for reporting related to the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput.

The show cause notice was sent to Arnab Goswami for making some remarks against Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackrey in his press debates on the Sushant Rajput case.

Arnab Goswami’s lawyer previously informed the Supreme Court that this cannot be interpreted as a breach of privilege.

In its order, the bench said: There is nothing wrong with being called by the assembly, but if a decision is made by the privilege committee, you can challenge it.

On September 30, the Supreme Court requested the response of the Secretary of the Assembly of Maharashtra to Arnab Goswami’s plea.

Arnab Goswami’s lawyer had previously told the judiciary that the journalist had not interfered in the work of any of the Assembly’s committees or in the Assembly itself.

Sushant Singh Rajput, 34, was found dead in his apartment in the Bandra suburb of Mumbai on June 14. The CBI is investigating the case.

(Except for the title, this story was not edited by GalacticGaming staff and is posted from a syndicated feed.)


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here