A Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and K S Radhakrishnan held that contempt proceedings were "perfectly maintainable" and that the court was under a "constitutional obligation" to find out whether there was a deliberate attempt to derail the probe into 2G case, which was being monitored by it. The bench in its show-cause notices have asked Roy and others to explain why criminal actions under Contempt of Court Act be not initiated against them. The court had earlier initiated the proceeding after taking a serious view of a questionnaire sent by a reporter of Sahara Samay Television, seeking personal information from the investigating officer Rajeshwar Singh, Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate, soon after summons were issued to Roy under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act for recording his statement.
The bench had also issued notices to Upendra Rai, Editor and News Director of Sahara India and Subodh Jain, reporter seeking their response in six weeks, rejoinder in two weeks thereafter and directed the matter to be listed after eight weeks.
The bench in its order had said: Having gone through the records we are prima facie of the view that an attempt has been made to interfere with the investigation conducted by Mr. Rajeshwar Singh in what has been described as 2G spectrum scam case and related matters. Therefore, we take suo motu cognisance and issue notices to them.
The bench had then also recorded an undertaking from Roy's counsel that Sahara India News Network and its sister concerns would not publish or broadcast any story or programme relating to Singh on the basis of the 25 questions sent by the reporter.