The Supreme Court's order on Wednesday in the Arnab Goswami case has major implications beyond just this one instance. Justice Chandrachud observed, "Forget Arnab Goswami for a moment, we are a Constitutional court.... If we as a Constitutional Court do not lay down law and protect liberty, then who will?" He went on to add, "If we don't interfere in this case today, we will walk on path of destruction. You may differ in ideology but Constitutional courts will have to protect such freedoms..." The remarks come at a time when thousands languish in jails in want of bail. These include the old and the infirm, like 81-year-old Varavara Rao accused in the Bhima-Koregaon case and Father Stan Swamy who suffers from Parkinson's. Both have been denied bail on medical grounds which raises the question: After the Supreme Court's observations that 'constitutional courts have to protect freedoms', will this set a precedent in other pending cases as well? We speak to senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi who was in Supreme Court in connection with this case.
