Libertatem Magazine

Madras High Court: Mere Apprehension of Spread of Coronavirus not enough to Stall Newspaper Publication

Contents of this Page

The Madras High Court on Thursday stated ‘a vibrant media’ is an asset for any democratic country and refused to stall booklet of newspapers after dismissing a plea that challenged the exemption given to print and electronic media from the national lockdown aimed to arrest the unfold of the Novel Coronavirus. A department bench comprising Justice N. Kirubakaran and Justice R Hemalatha said ‘mere apprehension or least possibility’ approximately whether or not the sickness may unfold through newspapers can’t be a floor to restrict their e-book as it would amount to a contravention of the Fundamental Rights, of not simplest the writer, editor but additionally the readers.

The suggestion for the petitioner relied upon the studies research that said that Coronavirus might persist up to four to 5 days and 24 days in paper and cardboard medium respectively. He said that once superior nations are suffering to control the unfold of the virus, the developing USA like India must not go through due to the circulate of the newspapers, as there’s a probability of spreading of the virus. However, Additional Advocate General PH Aravind Pandian submitted that research on this region changed into very constrained and no longer final.

“If there is the possibility of spread of virus not most effective via newspapers sources, even with the aid of the movement of money virus could be unfolded,” he stated and went on to factor out that Dr T Jacob John, Professor of Virology at Christian Medical College, Vellore had stated that spread of virus thru newspapers or papers is a least.

While disregarding the petition, the courtroom stated that the petitioner’s studies have been performed in international locations like Germany and UK and there too the Governments had not prohibited the e-book of newspapers and confused that initial researches and inside the absence of sufficient information, newspaper book could not be stalled. The courtroom also discovered the significance of the media in a democracy and that any try and restrict or limit the guide of newspapers would amount to the muzzling of independence of media even as also distinguishing between information and reviews.

“What is predicted is handiest the information and no longer the perspectives of the publisher,” the court emphasized. “News, as it is, must be delivered to the readers and no longer the perspectives of the publishers or his ideology. Though they’re entitled to position forth their ideology, humans want handiest the information as it stands. Mixing of perspectives and beliefs need to be averted. However, it’s miles a reality that some of the publishers are mixing their perspectives together with the news.” is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

About the Author