Bengaluru: Hearing the petition filed by convicted journalists Ravi Belagere and Anil Raj, the Karnataka High Court asked the Additional Advocate General whether there was a possibility to resolve the issue amicably.
Mr. Belagere and Anil Raj had moved HC on Tuesday, requesting to quash the resolution passed by the Legislative Assembly convicting them for an year. Hearing the petition on Thursday, Justice Ashok B. Hinchigeri observed that an attempt to resolve the issue should be made.
“Press is also an important organ in the system. Check with the Speaker and the Breach of Privilege Committee whether the resolution could be kept in abeyance with the approval of the Assembly. Also, check whether there is any provision for fresh enquiry against the petitioners. We will try to find out an acceptable solution,” Justice Hinchigeri orally instructed the AAG.
Mr. Ponnanna argued that the petitioners were not entitled for relief as one admitted himself to hospital, the other absconded, instead of surrendering before police.
Who will clarify crime & punishment?
Assembly Speaker K.B. Koliwad said: 'Kaul and Shakdher' is the bible for the legislature and it has defined the breach of privilege and the punishment. But Privilege Committee chairman Kimmane Rathnakar, realising there were grey areas in defining the crime and fixing the quantum of punishment, writes a letter to law secretary seeking clarity.
Mr. Ponnappa was raising objection to the petitioners' request for a stay on the resolution and the report submitted by the Privilege Committee.
Shankarappa V, the counsel representing the petitioners, submitted to the court that they were not given a copy of the proceedings of the committee, resolution passed by the Assembly and the order passed by the Speaker’s office to execute the resolution. “Though I went in person seeking the copies, the staff at the Secretariat said that the Speaker has instructed them not to give the certified copies,” Mr. Shankarappa argued. The judge directed that the copies should be given to the petitioners and these should be submitted to the court. Further, the defence counsel submitted that the issue was not in the purview of the Assembly, as the editors had not interfered in the functioning of the Assembly or MLAs. “The resolution is illegal as the Committee has recommended for conviction of the journalists without issuing any notice to Mr. Belagere and even after Anil Raj tendered unconditional apology,” he argued.
Objecting to this, the AGG produced copies of acknowledgement related to the opportunities provided to Mr. Belagere to justify himself. “While, Mr. Belagere failed to appear before the Committee, the other editor, Anil Raj, published another article against the complainant the very next day after tendering unconditional apology. Also, after the resolution was passed, Mr. Belagere made scathing remarks against the Speaker.”
Hearing the arguments, the judge asked the AAG to explain whether there was any guideline related to quantum of punishment to be awarded to journalist such cases and adjourned the hearing till Friday.
