Yuvraj's media gag petition: Court adjourns hearing for 10th time
Hearing on the petition of cricketer Yuvraj Singh’s plea, seeking direction to media houses to refrain from reporting about the personal lives of his family members, was adjourned by a Punjab and Haryana high court bench, 10th time in a row.punjab Updated: Dec 15, 2016 13:53 IST
Hearing on the petition of cricketer Yuvraj Singh’s plea, seeking direction to media houses to refrain from reporting about the personal lives of his family members, was adjourned by a Punjab and Haryana high court bench, 10th time in a row.
The order passed by the high court bench of justice RK Jain says,“On written request, adjourned to 25.01.2017.” The petition filed in June 2015 has been adjourned mostly on the requests made by the petitioner’s counsel.
The petition was filed in June 2015, when only those matters are heard by vacation benches in which there is some ‘urgency’. However, hearing was deferred on the request of Yuvraj’s counsel. The high court is yet to issue notice to any of the parties in the case including Chandigarh administration.
In his petition, Yuvraj Singh had sought direction to media to refrain from reporting, specifically in his younger brother Zorawar Singh Bundhel’s matrimonial discord case.
Zorawar had got married in February 2014 in a Fatehgarh Sahib Gurudwara in Punjab, but later filed for divorce in Chandigarh district court in April 30, 2015.
It was stated that the family had ‘apprehensions’ that in Zoravar’s matrimonial dispute, his Gurgaon based in-laws might hold press conferences with the ‘malafide intention’ to ‘tarnish their image’. Hence, the directions were sought.
Zorawar’s estranged wife, Akansha Sharma, was a contestant of ongoing Bigg Boss -Season 10, a reality TV show on a private channel.
On the first date of hearing, ie June 5, the high court had declined relief to Singh stating that “Freedom of speech or expression, which is a sacred right of an individual in a democracy conferred and enshrined in the Constitution of India, cannot be thwarted or stiffed much less merely on apprehension of an abuse.”