A seven‑judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court will convene on 6 October 2026, but it will not proceed to hear the merits of a case that questions whether legislative privilege can stifle free speech. The Court will meet only for formalities after a senior advocate for the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly informed the Bench that the 2003 resolution calling for the arrest of editors of The Hindu had been withdrawn the following year.
The withdrawal was raised orally by Raju Ramachandran before Chief Justice Surya Kant. Ramachandran argued that the Court’s order of reference issued in August did not reflect the fact that the resolution had been withdrawn. He urged the Chief Justice to reject the referral on the merits, calling it an academic exercise. Chief Justice Kant agreed that the Court should not engage in a prolonged academic debate, particularly with other matters pending, and suggested keeping the case formally open for future consideration. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Amit Anand Tiwari, appearing for the petitioners, acknowledged the withdrawal but maintained that the broader issue of legislative privilege versus free speech remains alive.
The dispute dates back to 2003 when The Hindu published an editorial critical of then Chief Minister Jayalalithaa. The Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker passed a resolution accusing the daily of distorting proceedings and, under Article 194(3), sought the arrest of its editorial staff. Police subsequently raided the newspaper’s Chennai office. Editor N. Ravi approached the Supreme Court, and senior advocate Harish Salve argued that invoking Article 194(3) could undermine the press freedom guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a).
Earlier, a Division Bench referred the matter to a five‑judge Constitution Bench, which in turn forwarded it to a seven‑judge Bench for a definitive ruling. The case was revisited in 2023 when the Union government was impleaded, and the Court again addressed procedural matters in February 2024. The latest hearing in August 2026 ended with the Court deciding not to examine the merits, pending the resolution’s withdrawal.
