Delhi High Court Slams Sensational Media Reporting on Courtroom Remarks, Warns Against Distortion While Dismissing Gupta’s Plea Against NBW

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday strongly criticised what it described as an alarming and growing pattern within the media — the tendency to sensationalise courtroom remarks and report even the most casual observations made during legal proceedings.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna expressed concern over how innocuous comments, often unrelated to case merits, are being amplified merely to attract public attention and create headlines.

According to the Court, this trend not only misleads the public but also risks distorting judicial intent.

“It has become a disturbing trend in recent times to report even some most innocuous remark that may be made by the Court during the case hearings, which may or may not even be connected with the proceedings, merely to create sensation,” the Court remarked.

It further emphasised that such remarks are often informal, hold no bearing on the final judgment, and should not be given undue prominence.

Justice Krishna stressed that media organisations bear a serious responsibility to conduct accurate and ethical reporting, stating that the public relies heavily on the media to understand ongoing court matters.

Since most citizens do not possess legal expertise, misleading interpretations could deeply influence public perception and undermine trust in judicial processes.

Clarification on Comment Misattributed to Target Senior Advocate

The bench issued these observations while clarifying that a comment it had made about repeated adjournments by lawyers was a general remark, not a specific criticism directed at Senior Advocate Vikas Pahwa.

Pahwa was representing businessman Shravan Gupta, accused in the AgustaWestland VVIP chopper money laundering case.

This clarification became necessary after multiple media outlets — including CNN News18, The Tribune, The Times Group, Indian Express, CSR Journal, and Law Trend — published pieces suggesting that the Court had termed Pahwa’s conduct “unbecoming of a Senior Advocate.”

According to Pahwa, no such remark was ever made in reference to him, and the statement does not appear in the judicial order.

The Court echoed this position, stating that attributing the remark to Pahwa was completely baseless and appeared designed purely to generate controversy and sensationalism.

“To falsely claim that the remark was specifically directed towards Pahwa is not only incorrect but is essentially designed to create a sensational news story of interest to the public at large,” the Court noted.

Pahwa then moved an application seeking action against what he called defamatory reporting.

Court Declines Action Against Media, But Issues Stern Advisory

Although the Court criticised the conduct of the media houses and underscored their duty to maintain integrity, it refrained from issuing formal orders against them.

Justice Krishna remarked that media platforms — with their professional experience in journalism — do not require judicial instructions to understand what is relevant and appropriate to report.

“For these news organisations, it is a matter of introspection whether such reporting should continue on their platforms,” the judge observed. She added,

“With their expertise in journalism and reporting, no guidance from any Court is required as to what is germane to the court proceeding that may be reported and that which is of no consequence.”

Non-Bailable Warrant Plea Rejected

In addition to addressing the media controversy, the Court also delivered judgment on Gupta’s main plea.

Shravan Gupta had challenged the non-bailable warrant issued against him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in the money laundering probe.

The High Court ultimately dismissed Gupta’s petition, allowing the enforcement proceedings to continue.

Legal Representation

• For Shravan Gupta: Senior Advocates Vikas Pahwa and Tanvir Ahmed Mir, assisted by Advocates Yudhister Singh, Prabhav Ralli, Saud Khan, Shiv Kapoor, and Pulkit Shree.
• For Enforcement Directorate: Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, Panel Counsel Vivek Gurnani with Advocates Kanishk Maurya and Kunal Kochar.

#DelhiHighCourt #MediaEthics #CourtReporting #Judiciary #EDCase #ShravanGupta #AgustaWestlandCase #LegalNews #PressFreedomAndResponsibility #JudicialObservations #VikasPahwa #NonBailableWarrant #LawAndMedia #CourtroomIntegrity