JUDGMENT : 1. Mr. S. Thapa, learned counsel appear along with contemnors, Smti. Patricia Mukhim, Editor Shillong Times and Smti. Shobha Chaudhuri, Publisher Shillong Times who also filed an additional affidavit/reply against the affidavit filed by the learned Amicus Curiae. 2. Mr. S. Thapa, learned counsel also submits that he has no submissions as because the case is between the contemnors and the Court. 3. On the other hand, learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. K. Ch. Gautam submit that when the matter is sub judice before this Court, the contemnors had posted bad remarks in the social media against the Amicus Curiae, which is a dangerous attack to the entire legal faculty and publishing such false report is scandalizing the Court. He also further stated that the media has the right to express under Article 19(a) of the Constitution of India, but subject to certain limitation. Mr. K. Ch. Gautam also submits that nowhere it is found mentioned in the additional affidavit/reply that the contemnors asked for apology. He also contended that why the contemnors target the lawyers and the judicial system. 4. Mr. C.H. Mawlong, learned Amicus Curiae submits that with regard to the news item under the caption When judges judge for themselves he stated that it is very unfair, intimidating and threatening and such type of reports brings a wrong message to the public. He also stated that the contemnors are giving wrong statements in the media with regard to lawyers. He also cited a judgment in the case of Bal Kishan Giri v. State of Uttar Pradesh: (2014) 7 SCC 280 Para 11, 22 & 23. The learned Amicus Curiae also submit that there is no apology from the contemnors. 5. Mr. N. Syngkon, learned Amicus Curiae referred to the order dated 27.05.2015 passed by the Full Bench of this High Court in WP(C) No. 127 of 2015 that this Court had directed the media not to publish any statement of HNLC or any organization, but the contemnors on 14.12.2018 published an Article under the heading HC Judge should step down: HNLC. He further stated that the contemnors have violated the Constitution of India. 6. Mr. S. Dey, learned Amicus Curiae submits that the contemnors had published another report in the Shillong Times dated 16.02.2019 wherein, it also appears at Para 5 of the additional affidavit. He further stated that the contemnors have violated the Constitution of India. 6. Mr. S. Dey, learned Amicus Curiae submits that the contemnors had published another report in the Shillong Times dated 16.02.2019 wherein, it also appears at Para 5 of the additional affidavit. He further stated that it appears that the contemnors are carrying a sword to kill the judiciary. He contended that nowhere in the additional affidavit, it is found mentioned about apologies, infact the contemnors are challenging and even did not spare the Amicus Curiae. He also submits that the contemnors have the freedom of speech and expression, but here the freedom of responsibility is missing. 7. Thereafter, the contemnors are placed questions on the basis of the materials available before this Court, but they have no answer, and no regret. 8. Registrar General, High Court of Meghalaya is also present. 9. Argument concluded. 10. Judgment reserved.