Media Trial and Judiciary

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES,

PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH
PROJECT TOPIC:
MEDIA TRIAL AND JUDICIARY
SUMBITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

MS.SONALPREET
TANISH DAHUJA,
SALAMAT 32/18
SINGH JAKHAR
B.A. LLB. Hons.
7th Semester,,19491
Section A
RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Ms.Sonalpreet
I extend my heartfelt thanks to my teacher and mentor Ms. Nidhi Sharma for giving me
an opportunity to work on this project which helped me to gain extensive knowledge on
the topic of Media Trial and Judiciary. During the making of the project, I came across
many things apart from the syllabus which proved to be a great learning experience for
me. I thank ma’am for guiding and helping me at all times. Without her support I would
have not been able to complete this project report.
Last but not the least; I thank my friends and batchmates for their help and support!
Salamat Singh Jakhar
Tanish Dahuja
Text

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Serial No. Particulars Page No.
1 Introduction 4
2 Freedom Of press in India 4-5
3 Media Trial 5-6

-Meaning of media
-Role of media in democratic society
-Media Trial
-Biased Opinion
-Judiciary to conduct trial not media
4 Fair Trial 7-8

-International Recognition of Fair Trial
India Recognition of Fair Trial
5 Role of Media in a democratic society 8-9
6 Media and Freedom of speech and expression 9

-Freedom is not absolute
7 Violation of Human Rights 10-12
-Burden of proving guilt of accused
-Reputation of Accused
-Security of witnesses
-Media cares only for TRP
-The so-called viral messages
8 Media Trial and Ill-Effects 12-13
9 Freedom of Speech Under Press Council India Act 13
10 Media Trial and Contempt of Courts Act 14

-conflict of rights
11 Famous Case Laws 15-19
-K.M.Nanavati v State of Maharashtra
-Sidhartha Vashisht @Manu Sharma vs State (NCT of Delhi)
-Md. Ajmal Md Amir Kasab @Abu… vs State of Maharashtra
-Nupur Talwar vs CBI & Anr.
-Sunanda Pushkar Death Case
-Sushant Singh Rajput Death Case
-Aryan Khan Drug Case
12 Judicial Remarks on Media Trial 20
13 Conclusion 21-22
14 References 23-24

INTRODUCTION
Free speech and Expression, under article 19(1)(a)1 are one of the most important and useful Rights
available in our Constitution.
This freedom plays a pivotal role in generating “public opinion” regarding “economic, political and
social matters”. This freedom comprises within its ambit the “distribution of information”, “freedom
of propagation and exchange of ideas” that helps forming one’s opinion and point of view and debates
on matters of public concern.
In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India2, Justice Bhagwati has highlighted on the importance of the
“freedom of speech and expression” as under:
“Democracy is based essentially on free debate and open discussion, for that is the only
corrective of government action in a democratic setup. If democracy means government of the
people by the people, it is obvious that every citizen must be entitled to participate in the
democratic process and in order to enable him to intelligently exercise his right of making a
choice, free and general discussion of public matters is absolutely essential.”
But this “right of freedom of speech and expression” is not absolute. According to Article 19 (2) of
the Constitution of India, nothing in Article 19 (1) (a) can “prevent the State from making any law, in
so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said
sub-clause in the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly
relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of Court,
Defamation or incitement to an offence.”
FREEDOM OF PRESS IN INDIA
The “freedom of the press” in India is not explicitly mentioned, but it is implicit in the “freedom of
speech and expression”.
Like many other freedoms, this freedom also flows from the “freedom of speech and expression”. The
Indian Press Commission said that ―Democracy can thrive not only under the vigilant eye of its
1
Art.19 (1) All citizens shall have the right— (a) to freedom of speech and expression;
2
AIR 1978 SC 597: (1978) 1 SCC 248.

legislature, but also under the care and guidance of public opinion and the press is par excellence, the
vehicle through which the opinion can become articulate.
The Apex Court has emphasized in various cases about the significance of maintaining “freedom of
the press” in a democratic society. The press tends to serve the “public interest” by making them aware
of any facts and opinions by way of publications without which the general public cannot make
responsible judgments.
The Government at times tries to suppress the “freedom of the press”. ―It is, therefore, the primary
duty of the Courts to uphold the said freedom and invalidate all laws or administrative actions which
interfere with the freedom of the press contrary to the constitutional mandate.3
In India, the order of the day is that freedom of the press cannot be restricted unless such restriction is
a reasonable one and not excessive. It is necessary to preserve and maintain the freedom of the press
in a democratic country but at the same time, it is also necessary to put some restrictions which are
permissible on that freedom. These restrictions cannot be unreasonable and it can be imposed only on
the grounds mentioned under the Article 19(2) of the Constitution, which are the grounds for imposing
a limitation on the “freedom of speech and expression.”
MEDIA TRIAL
Meaning of Media –
Media in simple words is a means of communication. It involves publishing, broadcasting and the
Internet. In the contemporary world, media has developed a lot, making the dissemination of
information easier than ever before.
Role of Media in Democratic society-
Media plays a very important role in a democracy. It creates in the society a sense of awareness
regarding the democratic and social obligations. Media is considered as the “fourth pillar” of
democracy and it brings to the people the information about the other three pillars, i.e., “executive,
legislature and judiciary”, by making their work transparent.
However, media at times try to mould or bend the public opinion and have the capacity to change the
viewpoint through which various events are perceived by the people. Media limiting itself to the
3
Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 515.

dissemination of information in a neutral manner to the general public is more preferable than trial by
media.
Meaning of Trial-
“Trial” in an ordinary sense means that a proceeding that takes place before a Court of justice.
According to Black’s Law Dictionary, “trial” means “a formal judicial examination of evidence and
determination of legal claims in an adversary proceeding”.4
Biased Opinions-
To keep up with the increasingly competitive market, the media frequently distorts the facts and
sensationalize news stories to grab the attention of the public. The media is frequently found publishing
biased opinions and spreading prejudice in the name of “news”. There are many incidences when the
media is found conducting a trial of an accused and giving its own decision even before the court
passed any judgment.
The Supreme Court of India has recorded on the consequence of media trial as under: ―
“the impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person’s reputation by creating a

widespread perception of guilt regardless of any verdict in a court of law. During high publicity
cases, the media are often accused of provoking an atmosphere of public hysteria akin to a
lynch mob which not only makes a fair trial impossible but means that regardless of the result
of the trial, in public perception the accused is already held guilty and would not be able to
live the rest of their life without intense public scrutiny.”5
Judiciary to Conduct Trial not Media-
Media trial is not appreciated in a democratic society and there is judiciary to conduct such trial, which
is considered as the competent institution for the administration of justice.
It is important to protect a citizen from being victimized by the media, even though it adds burden to
the criminal courts. Suppose on the basis of a suspicion that a crime has been committed, a person is
arrested then the person should not be declared as innocent or guilty by the media because it is not the
function of media. This function comes under the domain of the judiciary.
4
Justice v. Rajkumar, “Trial by Media”, http://www.livelaw.in/trial-by-media/ (retrieved on 21-10-2021)
5
R. K. Anand v. Delhi High Court, (2009) 8 SCC 106

So, the “trial by media” affects the judgment of the Court and at the same time also harms the accused
because the accused should be generally presumed as innocent until he is proven guilty.
FAIR TRIAL
One of the important features of democracy is the conducting of a fair trial. Fair trial means a trial that
takes place before a judge who is impartial, a prosecutor who is fair and in a calm judicial atmosphere.
International Recognition of Fair trial-
• Every country that respects the “rule of law” considers the “right to fair trial” as an
indispensable right. Article 10 of the UDHR runs as follows “Everyone is entitled in full
equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the
determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.”
• Article 11 of UDHR provides that ―Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be
presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all
the guarantees necessary for his defence.” Article 14 and 16 of “International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights” also protects the “right to fair trial” and it is binding on the member
states.
Indian Recognition of Fair Trial-
• When taking into consideration the Indian legal system, this international promise relating to
the fair trial has its reflection in the constitutional scheme and procedural law. “Right to fair
trial” in a “criminal prosecution” is impliedly mentioned under the “right to life” guaranteed
by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
• So, right to fair trial in a democracy is of utmost importance from proper administration justice.
When a fair trial is denied to an accused, it is as much injustice to the “accused” as much as it
is to the “victim” and the “society”.6
But, today, our 'Media Studios' have literally turned to be a courtroom for all purposes. The facts of
the particular case in all their lurid details, full particulars – correct or otherwise - the various steps and
stages of police investigation, freely embroidered with subjective comments and observations are
presented, evidence discussed, expert opinion sought, even the public is given an opportunity to
participate in this process. They can send in their views by sms or by logging on to the channel's
6
Justice Y. Srinivasa Rao, “Concept of Fair Trial”, https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/right-to-fair-trial-by-y-srinivasa-
rao-judge/ (retrieved on 21-10-2021).

website. The conclusion tending either to pronounce on the guilt of certain persons or on the motives
of the investigators are being splashed in the mass media. What role is the media playing here?
Today, one will be forced to admit, though reluctantly and with regret, that there exists a system of
parallel justice administration in the country. Isn't this plain megalomania, which feels nobody can
question their actions?
In a premier English news channel, it was seen asking: “Do you believe in the Judiciary, or do you
believe Judiciary needs a push from media?” On another channel, the presenter was seen haranguing
his audience: "Does it require public pressure for the wheels of justice to move?” These two are
purportedly discussing trial by media; but the subject is: would there have been justice without our
intervention?
ROLE OF MEDIA IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY
The Supreme Court of India explained that the right of the people to know is the fundamental principle
behind the “freedom of the press”.
The Supreme Court stated,
“The primary function, therefore, of the press is to provide comprehensive and objective
information on all aspects of the country’s political, social, economic and cultural life. It has
an educative and mobilizing role to play. It plays an important role in molding public
opinion”.7
There is no doubt that powerful independent journalism still exists. In India, the press busted many big
scams (Like the Harshad Mehta 1992 Scam) in the past.
“A positive by product of changes stimulated by the media and addressed by the Courts is that more
people in India are conscious of their constitutional rights than ever before.”
But the freedom of the press is required to be utilized for the good of the public rather influencing their
mind, with the intention of grabbing maximum attention on news items which may not be of public
interest, only for the purpose of excelling in the competition to be on the top.
7
In Re: Harijai Singh and Anr.; In Re: Vijay Kumar, (1996) 6 SCC 466.

MEDIA AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION
The freedom relating to media does not find its mention anywhere in the Part Ⅲ of the Indian
Constitution. In Constituent Assembly Debates, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar said that:
“Press has no special rights which are not to be given or which are not to be exercised by the
citizens in his individual capacity. The editor of a press or the manager is merely exercising
the right of the expression, and therefore, no special mention is necessary of the freedom of
the press.” 8
Freedom of Media is not Absolute
Even committed liberals are of the view that free speech rights are not unconditional or unlimited but
they are not sure about what are the limits that should be set. Free press does not provide a license to
publish and broadcast anything without any restriction. It is the duty of the media to make sure that
the information received by the general public is accurate and does not in any way affects the rights of
other.
Thus, the Article 19 (2) sets out the grounds on which limits can be imposed upon the “freedom of
expression”. Those “limits” flow from the “right to privacy”, “right to reputation”, the law of
“contempt of court” etc.
So, while criticizing a person if the press indulges in libel or slander then the press has to be answerable
in law for such an offence. Similarly, by using “freedom of speech and expression” as a veil by the
“press”, it cannot infringe the privacy of an individual. Also, the press cannot take up parallel trials
when a trial is going on before a court of law. This will amount into “contempt of court”.
One of the most criticized and serious issues of the day is the coverage of sensational crimes by media
and ignorance of the real issues in question. In the beginning, they take up the so-called “evidence” to
bolster up a “scoop”.
8
Dr. Ambedkar’s Speech in Constituent Assembly Debates, VII, 980.

Violation of Human Rights
Burden to proof guilt of Accused
In criminal cases, the principle remains constant that the initial burden is on the prosecution to establish
that the accused has committed a crime. If the prosecution fails to establish beyond reasonable doubt
that the accused is guilty, the accused is entitled to an acquittal.9
In the famous case of Woolmington v. DPP,10 Stating the judgment for a unanimous Court, Viscount
Sankey made his famous "Golden thread" that the burden of proving is on prosecution beyond the
reasonable doubt.11
But if burden of proof is put on the shoulders of the wrong party, the Supreme Court states that this
would vitiate the entire judicial system.12
And the media trial is a perfect example of this shifting the burden on accused that it had not committed
the crime. This is in total violation of the basic principles of jurisprudence to prove beyond the
reasonable doubt by the prosecution and fundamental rights of the accused.
Reputation of Accused
Media is not acquainted with the traditional rules according to which evidence are to be cited and
therefore, are not well versed to talk about the evidence that are substantial for declaring an accused
as a convict. Thus, this frequently takes away from the victim the right to justice. This type of mockery
of the right to justice is more evident when an ordinary criminal or accused is made equivalent to a
seasoned criminal or a felony by the media, without conducting any appropriate investigation on the
subject-matter.
In most of the cases, media is least bothered by the reputation of the accused and is more concerned
with creating a “Breaking News Item” Nowadays, it is very common to see that the accused is put on
trial by media and is declared as convict without even giving an opportunity to the other side to be
heard, which blatantly harms the natural justice principle.
It is not only the reputation of the accused that is destroyed but also the family of the accused who
suffers along the way and even after the accused is acquitted by the Court the ruined reputation is
9
Ouseph v. State of Kerala, (2004) 4 SC 446: A.I.R 2004 SC 2088
10
[1935] UKHL 1
11
Woolmington v. Director of Public Prosecutions
https://casebrief.fandom.com/wiki/Woolmington_v_Director_of_Public_Prosecutions
12
Rangammal v. Kuppuswami A.I.R 2011 SC 2344.

beyond retrieval. So, even after their acquittal, it becomes difficult for them to restore their former
image in the eyes of the public.
In the infamous Jessica Lal Murder case, where Manu Sharma was tried and convicted for murder, the
court held that “There is danger, of serious risk of prejudice if media exercises an unrestricted and
unregulated freedom such that it publishes photographs of the suspects or the accused before the
identification parades are constituted or if media publishes statements which out rightly hold the
suspect or accused guilty even before such an order has been passed by the court.” In the
aforementioned case, certain articles immediately after the date of occurrence caused a confusion in
the mind of the public as to the description and number of actual assailants / suspects.
It is absolutely not fair to cause taint to the reputation of a person by creating widespread perception
of guilt, regardless of any verdict in a court of law
The suspect gets negative publicity and later even if the court finds him innocent, his future remains
uncertain because of the stories cooked up by the media.
Security of Witnesses
The security of the witnesses is also often jeopardized by irresponsible reporting. If the identity of the
witness is published, there is danger of him coming under pressure both from the accused or his
associates. This is one of the main reasons why almost everyone is hesitant to report a crime or appear
as witness.
With the unfettered interference of the media, each witness wants to retract and get out of the muddle.
Sting operations are conducted to point out the lacunae in investigations and trial much before the
investigation or trial has progressed considerably. This affects the morale of the police and other
investigation agencies. The police are often made a scapegoat. The over enthusiastic media often puts
a lot more pressure than required on the police to speed up the investigation. Speedy investigation
under pressure can lead to arrest of innocent persons.
Media Cares only for TRP
It seems that “media trial” has moved to “media verdict” which clearly indicates the misuse of freedom
of speech. After the introduction of Target Rating point (TRP) the competition has increased among
the media houses which has created great amount of pressure on journalism. Before the introduction
of this TRP, journalists used to work with braveness, integrity and impartially. But with the need of

increasing TRP scales, the media war has become ruthless. For the purpose of regulating the media
certain guidelines and norms are set by the Press Council of India. Lately, the media is misusing its
freedom in the garb of the “freedom of speech and expressing”. “Freedom of expression” is allowed
only to the extent to which it does not have any harmful effect on others.
In India, the media has transformed into a “People’s Court” or “Janta ki Adalat”, trying by holding
“media trials” not only to represent a biased opinion even before the declaration of a verdict but also
generating a pressure on the courts to settle in accordance with their opinion.13 The trend that media
trial has introduced into this contemporary world is that “public interest” is not important but “what
the public is interested in” is more important.14
The so-called Viral Messages
With the growth of electronic media, the conduct of parallel trials by media outside the portal of Court
has reached new peaks. This type of information attracts the social media platform users resulting into
flooding of these messages. The parallel trial conducted relating to sub judice matters hampers the
ability of a judge to decide a matter on its merits.
When any decision of the judge goes against this so-called “media verdict” then the media even try to
term it as bias or corrupt. If the sub judice matters are constantly updated and scrutinized then a clouded
environment is created then it leaves the case in a perilous situation.
Media possesses enormous powers to subconsciously affect any case and a question is frequently
raised whether by way of participative journalism the media has turned out to be the “voice” of masses
or the “noise”, that subliminally influences the judge presiding over a matter, which has been publicly
tried prior to the Court’s conclusion.
Media Trial and Its Ill Effects
Media often forgets the fact that law is not governed by emotions. The significance of the right to fair
trial can be understood from the fact the Article 21 of Constitution of India, which impliedly deals
with fair trial, cannot be suspended even during an emergency.15
The Supreme Court of India on “trial by media” has observed that the law has established a procedure
according to which the trial of an accused person is to be conducted and a trial by “electronic media”,
13
Rashmi Rawat, Media trials: The Escalating Influence on Judiciary, MYADVO Blog,
https://www.myadvo.in/blog/media-trials-the-escalating-influence-on-judiciary/
14
Zehra Khan, “Trial-By-Media: Derailing Judicial Process in India”, 1 MLR (2010), p. 94.
15
Prerana Priyanshu, “Freedom Media Trial: Freedom of Speech v. Fair Trial”, 3 IJLLJS (2015), p. 287.

“press” or “public agitation” is contradictory to rule of law. This may result in miscarriage of justice.
A judge should never get influenced by such pressures and strictly follow the rule of law. Once a judge
finds out that the person is guilty of an offence then the question relating to the sentence to be awarded
should be addressed by the Judge himself, and it must be according to the provisions of the law.16
Freedom of speech Under Press Council of India Act
Press Council of India Act, constituted a body named Press Council of India. It is a statutory
autonomous body. Its object broadly was to preserve freedom of press. The Council could warn,
admonish, or censure a newspaper or a news agency for any professional misconduct, or breach of
code of journalistic ethics, or offence against the public interest. It could also condemn the Government
or other Organizations for interfering with freedom of press. It enjoyed the same powers, while holding
an inquiry under Press Council Act, as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the Code of
Civil Procedure.
The Council could also ask a defaulting newspaper to publish the council’s finding. The Council is
empowered on complaints made it or otherwise, against offending newspapers. The Press Council
safeguards freedom of press maintains and improves standards of newspapers and news agencies. It is
comprised mainly from the newspapers that are charged with the responsibility of regulating the
conduct of brethren. The Council has thus assumed the role of a self-regulating body of the newspapers
themselves. The Council has the power to consider complaints suo-moto; in addition to enquiry into
complaints brought before it. It has empowered to make observation against authority, including
Government, if it considers it necessary for the performance of its functions.
Thus, the Press Council is a statutory, quasi-judicial and self-regulating body without teeth (power to
impose legal penalties). The power of Press Council of India is limited and increase in tendency of
media sensationalism and competition among the newspapers which accelerated media to deviate from
their traditional accountability and ethical values.
Consequently, the invasion on individual rights as well as collective rights is raising, thereby a need
for a strengthened statutory body is need of the media world.
16
State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi, 1997 (8) SCC 386.

Media Trial and Contempt of Courts Act
For the purpose of protecting this right to fair trial provisions are included in the Contempt of Courts
Act, 1971 and under Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India, which empowers the Supreme
Court and High Courts respectively “to punish for contempt of itself”. Therefore, liability for Contempt
of Court may arise on the part of a journalist who publishes anything that may prejudice a “fair trial”
or harms the impartiality of a Court to decide a cause on its merit.
Saibal Kumar v. BK. Sen, the Supreme Court tried to discourage the tendency of media trial and
remarked,
“No doubt, it would be mischievous for a newspaper to systematically conduct an independent

investigation into a crime for which a man has been arrested and published the details of
investigation. This is because trial by newspapers, when a trial by one of the regular tribunals
of the country is going on, must be prevented. The basis for this view is that Such action on the
part of a newspaper tends to interfere with the course of justice, whether the investigation tends
to prejudice the accused or the prosecution.”
Conflict of Rights
Now the question arise is whether this negative approach of law is inconsistent with the constitutionally
guaranteed right of freedom of speech and expression. In this connection it may be pointed out that the
constitution in Art: 19(2) expressly save the operation of law of contempt of court. While Judiciary is
the third pillar of the democracy media is considered to be an integral part of it. Media cross the
demarcating line of control which resulted invasion on functions of other organs of democracy
especially judiciary. Unfair and inaccurate reporting of pending cases adversely affects the criminal
justice administration in India. The remedy against such an act is the Sec.2 of Contempt of Court Act
1972. The Contempt of Court Act defines contempt as both civil and criminal.
In M.P. Lohia v. State of West Bengal 17 the Supreme Court strongly deprecated the media for
interfering with the administration of justice by publishing one-sided articles touching on merits of
cases pending in the Courts.18
17
(2005) 2 SCC 686.
18
S.2 of Contempt of Courts Act 1972 states that "contempt of court" means civil contempt or criminal contempt;

K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra19
1. In this case the question was that whether K.M. Nanavati was guilty in intentionally killing of
the deceased, as his wife as confessed to him about his illicit relationship or it was the result of
sudden and grave provocation?
2. In this case, we saw the utter failure and flaws of the system of jury trials. If it had been for the
jury, Nanavati would have been acquitted and would have been walking the streets as a free
man.
3. The jury in the Sessions court brought a verdict of ‘not guilty’ under both charges by an 8:1
majority. The Sessions judge then submitted the case to the Bombay High Court, as he was
opposed to the opinion of the jury. An appeal was hereafter made.
4. It was claimed that jury had been influenced by media and was open to being misled.
5. In appeal filed to the high court, the conviction was converted to punishment for murder. We
also see how the judgment of the Supreme Court is absolutely the reverse of the jury.
6. Members of the jury are members of the society who may or may not be informed about the
legal profession or the intricacies of the law. Depending on such people for the offences like
murder is risky for the population as a whole.
7. This case shows us the shortcomings of jury trials and how they can handicap the process of
providing justice to the citizens. In this case, the jury empathized with a dejected husband and
thus, their judgment is considered to be flawed. As jury members were mostly members of the
society in general and not legal professional or judges, these shortcomings were expected from
the jury trials system. They were highly influenced by the media, community and society.
8. The infamous navy case was apparently termed as the last case where the judgement was
delivered by jury but in reality, jury continued to work even after the case in a few places as
mentioned above. It was only in 1969 after the 41st Report of the Law Commission was released
that the Government decided to bury the jury.20
19
1962 AIR 605
20
Life and Times of Jury System in India- A Legal Analysis, LiveLaw (Jun 6, 2019), available at
https://www.livelaw.in/life-times-jury-system-india-legal-analysis/. Retrieved on (21-10-2021)

Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma v. State (NCT Of Delhi)21
1. Miss Jessica Lal was a model bar-maid at a party. After midnight, Manu Sharma walked in
with three friends and demanded to be served liquor, offering ₹ 1000. Lal refused, and Sharma
then fired a 22 calibre pistol at the ceiling as an intimidating act. Lal refused again, Sharma
fired back and the second bullet hit Lal in the head, killing her.
2. On 23.11.2000, the Additional Sessions Judge of Delhi trial court framed charges against the
appellant/Manu Sharma under Sections 302, 201 read with 120-B IPC and Section 27 of the
Arms Act, but slowly, most witnesses turned hostile, which eventually led to the acquittal of
all the nine accused in this case.
3. The Delhi Police failed to sustain the grounds that they have made the case as the Delhi Police
was unable to find the murder weapon.
4. This led to the widespread public outcry, and the brave and gutsy media came to the picture.
News Magazine, like Tehelka, seized this opportunity to expose the loopholes of the trial. Many
witnesses were secretly filmed, and they have confessed in the sting operation that they were
bribed to turn hostile during the trial proceeding, and those who could not be bribed were given
threats of dire consequences. The audio recording of the main accused he gave in the policy
custody was also leaked in the media. In that audio, he confessed that on April 29, 1999, he
was there at the party and demanded alcohol from Jessica Lal. Since his demands were not
obliged with, he felt humiliated and, in a rage, to shoot Jessica Murder dead. Due to these sting
operations, SMS campaigns for Justice for Miss Jessica Lal, and public pressure, the Police
went to the High court, and an appeal was filed against this case.
5. The High Court reversed the decision of the trial court and awarded life imprisonment to Manu
Sharma. The Supreme Court of India approved the sentences in the Jessica Lal murder case. It
said that the evidence regarding the actual incident, the testimonies of witnesses, the evidence
connecting the vehicles and cartridges to the accused Manu Sharma, and his conduct after the
incident prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The High Court has analyzed all the
evidence and arrived at the correct conclusion. The Supreme Court accepted that there had been
an element of “trial by media” but believed that it had not affected the decision of the Hon’ble
Court.
21
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 157 OF 2007

6. Also, it was seen in this case that renowned lawyer Ram Jethmalani decided to appear for the
accused Manu Sharma, his morality was questioned and one of the media houses also declared
that Jethmalani was trying to “defend the indefensible”.
Md.Ajmal Md.Amir Kasab @Abu ... v. State Of Maharashtra
Again, in the 26/11 trial, where the main suspect Ajmal Kasab was represented by a lawyer
named Abbas Kazmi, who claimed that he had gone through mental harassment by media and
the Public Prosecutor which distressed him. These instances raise an important question that is
the judiciary of India so weak to administer justice that the opportunity to be defended needs
to be denied.
Nupur Talwar v. CBI & Anr22
In the Aarushi Talwar murder case of 2008, the media had declared who was guilty even before
the trial began. There were mass protests and the public was hysterical over news reports
alleging that her parents were the cause of her death.
Sunanda Pushkar death case
1. Sunanda Pushkar, the wife of renowned politician Shashi Tharoor, was found dead in a hotel.
Initial reports claimed that it was a suicide but later reports mentioned that the reason of death
was not natural and injury marks on the body were revealed in the preliminary autopsy report
given by the AIIMS.
2. On the very same day of the death of Sunanda Pushkar, without any delay, the media reached
the scene and since then we have been witnessing the story of mysterious murder case
dominated by the media. When the Delhi Police Commissioner was asked by the media houses
about labeling Tharoor as the prime suspect, then he refused to label Tharoor and said that they
were in no hurry to question Tharoor. But as the media always does, started with their media
trial and declared Shashi Tharoor as the murderer.23
3. Disclosing of half-truths, cherry-picking of facts and twisting of statements were considered to
be more preferable than trying to put forward the actual facts about the case. Some of the media
houses were continuously showing a statement of some distant cousin of Pushkar claiming that
it was a clear case of murder and Tharoor was the murderer.
22
REVIEW PETITION (CRL.) NO. 85 OF 2012
23
Shehzad Poonawalla, “In defence of Shashi Tharoor”, https://www.news18.com/news/politics/indefence-of-shashi-
tharoor-736044.html (retrieved on 22-10-2021)

4. The media was blatantly narrating personal conversations maligning people, confidential
medical reports etc. These journalists for the sole purpose of remaining in the competition were
trying to play an autopsy surgeon, cop, scientist, investigator, forensic expert and most
significantly trying to play the role of a judge, which as a result affects the proper
administration of justice. This trial by media on Sunanda Pushkar’s death case creates the
necessity to have a formal entity to set out some norms and responsibilities to media about
media ethics because they have miserably failed in their promise of self-regulation.24
5. In the year 2017, Shashi Tharoor filed a defamation suit in Delhi High Court against a well-
known media house. The Court observed that the “right to silence” of Shashi Tharoor must be
respected by the Journalist and his channel during the pendency of the investigation in Sunanda
Pushkar’s death case. The Court further said that the Journalist and his channel are free to state
facts in relation to the investigation but cannot announce Shashi Tharoor to be the murderer.
The ground on which the suit was filed was that by incriminating Shashi Tharoor in the death
of Sunanda Pushkar it risked prejudicing the investigation and any subsequent trial. The suit
also raised the concern for a balance between free speech and media trial.25
6. The Court was of the view that after the commencement of the criminal investigation media
reporting needs to be sensitive to the uncertainty relating to the questions rose in the
proceedings. The “press” cannot declare anyone convict or insinuate anyone guilty or make
any kind of unsubstantiated claims. Care and caution must be taken by the press while reporting
on pending trial or matter under investigation.26
7. Media is not restrained from informing about the facts of a case but is restrained from making
any prior judgment because it is not competent to conduct a trial.
24
G. Pramod Kumar, “Sunanda Pushkar’s death case: How reckless TV channels invite state control”,
https://www.firstpost.com/india/sunanda-pushkars-death-case-reckless-tv-channels-invite-state-control-2053661.html
(22-10-2021).
25
Devika Agarwal, “Shashi Tharoor’s “right to silence: Balancing free speech and trial by media”,
https://www.firstpost.com/india/shashi-tharoors-right-to-silence-balancing-free-speech-and-trial-by-media-3922079.html
(22-10-2021).
26
IANS, “Republic TV can report on Tharoor, can’t compel him to speak on Pushkar death: HC”,
https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/tharoor-can-t-be-compelled-to-speak-on-pushkar-death-hc-tells-
republic-tv-117120100613_1.html (22-10-2021).

Sushant Singh Rajput Suicide Case
Another Example of media trial is Sushant Singh Rajput death case. The Bombay High Court
asked if the current mechanism for self-regulation of the electronic media was enough to
maintain a balance between right to freedom of speech and expression and the right of the
accused to a fair trial and reputation. A division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and
Justice Girish S Kulkarni was hearing a PIL filed by eight former senior police officers from
Maharashtra, as well as activists, lawyers and NGOs seeking a restraining order against “media
trial” in actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s death case.
The court said in the present case, “substantial damage has been caused to the reputations of
the persons so-called involved”.
“It takes years of hard work to build a reputation and with just one stroke it is brought from top
to bottom. Without being punished, there is stigma on their forehead till the trial is completed,
no matter if they are cleared of the charges,” the court said.
Aryan Khan Drug Case
Aryan Khan was arrested because of an alleged drug bust by the Narcotics Control Bureau
(NCB) in Mumbai. The young man has spent considerable time in jail, been slandered online,
and has his face (and private information) plastered over the web. A lot of hate that Aryan Khan
is getting seems to be simply because he is famous by association. Comments like ‘his father
is rich,’ ‘these star kids are all like this,’ and ‘all these kids do drugs’ were floating around on
the internet, with some other strongly worded and politically charged commentary thrown in
as well.
In the process of this very public trial, what is forgotten is that mental health is a fickle and
brittle thing. Small things may trigger a cascade that leads to a lifetime of mental health issues.
Before the hon’ble Judiciary passed a judgement or even there could be a trial in this case,
Aryan Khan has probably dealt with a lot of unwelcome media attention in his life already, but
as a 23-year-old boy and a star kid, this communal badmouthing, doubting, and harassment is
probably leaving a mark that we might not be able to see, but he will always be able to feel.27
27
https://www.idiva.com/health-wellness/mental-health/aryan-khans-mental-health/18025328 (22-10-2021)

Judicial remarks on media trial
In the words of Justice Pathanjali Sasthri, it is stated that Art: 19(1) (a) is the foundation of all
democratic institution. Without free political discussion public education is not possible. The free
media is essential for the proper functioning of democracy. Dr Ambedkar in his speech in Constituent
Assembly Debates (Vol. VII 980) says “The press has no special rights which are not to be given or
which are not to be exercised by the citizens in his individual capacity. The editor of press or the
manager is merely exercising the right of expression, and therefore no special mention is necessary of
the freedom of press.”28
Indian Constitution does not specifically mention the liberty of mass media. But the speech and
expression cover the rights relating to broadcasting. The decision in Maneka Gandhi’s case29 reinforces
this view. In this case it is held that “it is not correct view that the right which is specifically mentioned
by name can never be a fundamental right or takes of same basic nature and character as the named
fundamental right so that the exercise of such right is in reality and substance nothing but an instance
of the exercise of named fundamental right. The court declared that the day this clearing house closes
down would toll the death knell of democracy. The constitution of India provides regulatory provisions
to protect both sides of electronic media ventures. The broadcaster as well as the beneficiary of the
media is brought within the umbrellas of protection as well as regulation. Art: 13 prescribes that any
law in derogation to the principle of fundamental right are void ab initio. Indian Constitution does not
specifically mention the liberty of mass media, but the word speech and expression upheld this view.30
The Press Council of India has expressed that
“Democracy can thrive not only under the vigilant eye of the legislature, but also under the
care and guidance of public opinion and the press is par excellence, the vehicle through which
Opinion can become articulate. The freedom of speech and expression includes right to acquire
information and disseminate it. Freedom of speech and expression is necessary for self-
expression which is an important means of free conscience and self-fulfillment. It enables
people to contribute to debates of social and moral issues. It is the best way to find out the
truest model of anything sincere which is only through it that widest possible range of ideas
can circulate. It is the only vehicle of political discourse so essential to democracy.”
28
Romesh Thapar v. Union of India, AIR 1950 SC 124
29
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, 1978 AIR 597
30
Dr. Myneni SR. Media law (with right to Information Act), Hyderabad Asia Law House, 2014, 51.

Conclusion
No freedom, however sacred it may be, can be absolute. This is also true of press freedom. Not only
the freedom of press is subject to the laws of the land, such as contempt and libel, but also is responsible
to the society it serves. It should accept certain responsibilities in the discharge of its function.
The press has an obligation –voluntary and self-imposed that in presentation of truthful news and fair
comment it adheres to certain norms of decency and decorum, and that it does not indulge in vulgarity,
obscenity, character assassination, violation of citizen’s privacy and incitement to offence, disorder
and disintegration of the country.
The press is a public service and, therefore, accountable to the community as a whole. Press freedom
means not only freedom from unnecessary restraints, but also freedom for the purpose of advancing
certain basic concepts enshrined in the constitution. It is agreed by all that press is an essential organ
of democratic set up, an important vehicle of communication and a vital instrument in the creation of
public opinion. As such it is necessary that the media persons should regard their profession as a trust
to serve public interest.
Any code, to be drawn up in future, should provide that the press must “present a truthful,
comprehensive and reliable account of the events in a context which gives them meaning, project a
representative picture of constituent groups in the society, regard itself as a forum for comment and
criticism and discharge its social responsibilities by clarifying the goals and values in the society”.
Also, in presentation of news as well as comments, the press should avoid sensationalism and
vulgarity. It should eschew publication of reports tending to incite violence which may lead civil
disorder, mutiny or rebellion. Anything obscene or tending to encourage the crime or unlawful
activities should be kept out of both news and advertisement columns. Rumors, gossips and scurrilous
reports concerning the private life of an individual should be avoided.
It has been 68 years since India became Republic and commencement of the Constitution there is been
a lot of ups and down in our democracy and the press also has come across age. As being a subject of
the largest democracy of the world we should remember the words of our former Prime Minister Rajiv
Gandhi, that the time has come for the press of the largest democracy in the world to work with hand-
in-hand with judiciary for the welfare of its subjects.

Thus, it is true that the media forms the backbone of a democratic society. It subjects the functioning
of all public institutions to public scrutiny, and makes them answerable and accountable to the public
to whom they have to serve. It also plays an important role in assisting in administration of justice.
However, it cannot be ignored that at times the media fails to exercise the freedom of press conferred
upon it by the Constitution in ‘public interest’ as pointed out above. It neglects the real and core issues
which the society is facing. It forgets its social responsibility towards the people. It is for this reason
that a need arises to regulate this freedom of press.
A responsible media is the handmaiden of effective judicial administration. Free and robust reporting,
criticism and debate should be there which contributes to public understanding of rule of law and a
better comprehension of the entire justice system.

References
1. Bare Acts
• The Constitution of India, 1950
• The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
2. Websites
• Diva Rai, Jessica Lal murder case: The epitome of judicial and media activism in India,
August 5, 2020 available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/jessica-lal-murder-case-the-
epitome-of-judicial-and-media-activism-in-india/ (retrieved on 21-10-2021).
• Bachi Karkaria, Nanavati case marked many firsts – trial by media & tussle between
judiciary and executive, 27 April, 2019, available at
https://theprint.in/opinion/nanavati-case-marked-many-firsts-trial-by-media-tussle-
between-judiciary-and-executive/227964/ (retrieved on 21-10-2021).
• Bachi Karkaria, A 'crime of passion' that India never forgot, 14 May 2017, available at
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-39790535 (retrieved on 21-10-2021).
• Justice V. Rajkumar, “Trial by Media”, http://www.livelaw.in/trial-by-media/
(retrieved on 21-10-2021).
• Justice Y. Srinivasa Rao, “Fair Trial” https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/right-to-
fair-trial-by-y-srinivasa-rao-judge/, (retrieved on 21-10-2021).
• Hon'ble Mr. Justice G. S. Singhvi, TRIAL BY MEDIA: A NEED TO REGULATE
FREEDOM OF PRESS∗ Oct.- Dec., 2012, Bharati Law Review available at
www.manupatra.com (retrieved on 22-10-2021).
• Dr. Sumayya H, Media trial and Indian legal system, International Journal of Law,
Volume 6; Issue 1; January 2020 available at
https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahU
KEwjBpMCB_cjtAhXkFqYKHc5CCRYQFjAAegQIBBAC&url=http%3A%2F%2F
www.lawjournals.org%2Fdownload%2F569%2F6-1-19-
345.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2q9DZ4Sg3GqhfS5uzKYYys (retrieved on 22-10-2021).
• Woolmington v. Director of Public Prosecutions [1935] UKHL
https://casebrief.fandom.com/wiki/Woolmington_v_Director_of_Public_Prosecutions

• Rashmi Rawat, Media trials: The Escalating Influence on Judiciary, MYADVO Blog,
https://www.myadvo.in/blog/media-trials-the-escalating-influence-on-judiciary/
• Life and Times of Jury System in India- A Legal Analysis, LiveLaw (Jun 6, 2019),
available at https://www.livelaw.in/life-times-jury-system-india-legal-analysis/.
• Shehzad Poonawalla, “In defence of Shashi Tharoor”,
https://www.news18.com/news/politics/indefence-of-shashi-tharoor-736044.html
• https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/tharoor-can-t-be-compelled-to-
speak-on-pushkar-death-hc-tells-republic-tv-117120100613_1.html (retrieved on 22-
10-2021).
• https://www.firstpost.com/india/sunanda-pushkars-death-case-reckless-tv-channels-
invite-state-control-2053661.html (retrieved on 22-10-2021).
• https://www.firstpost.com/india/shashi-tharoors-right-to-silence-balancing-free-
speech-and-trial-by-media-3922079.html (retrieved on 22-10-2021).
• https://www.idiva.com/health-wellness/mental-health/aryan-khans-mental-
health/18025328 (retrieved on 22-10-2021)
• https://www.freepressjournal.in/viral/no-method-to-this-madness-of-hate-netizens-
condemn-media-trial-of-aryan-khan-after-arrest-in-drug-party-case (retrieved on 22-
10-2021)

Media Trial and Judiciary

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Media Trial and Judiciary

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Media Trial and Judiciary

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES,

MEDIA TRIAL AND JUDICIARY

SUMBITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 1

Salamat Singh Jakhar

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 2

2 Freedom Of press in India 4-5

3 Media Trial 5-6

4 Fair Trial 7-8

6 Media and Freedom of speech and expression 9

8 Media Trial and Ill-Effects 12-13

9 Freedom of Speech Under Press Council India Act 13

10 Media Trial and Contempt of Courts Act 14

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 3

FREEDOM OF PRESS IN INDIA

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 4

Role of Media in Democratic society-

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 5

“the impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person’s reputation by creating a

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 6

International Recognition of Fair trial-

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 7

ROLE OF MEDIA IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY

The Supreme Court stated,

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 8

MEDIA AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION

Freedom of Media is not Absolute

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 9

Violation of Human Rights

Burden to proof guilt of Accused

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 10

Media Cares only for TRP

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 11

The so-called Viral Messages

Media Trial and Its Ill Effects

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 12

Freedom of speech Under Press Council of India Act

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 13

Media Trial and Contempt of Courts Act

“No doubt, it would be mischievous for a newspaper to systematically conduct an independent

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 14

K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra19

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 15

Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma v. State (NCT Of Delhi)21

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 16

Sunanda Pushkar death case

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 17

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 18

Sushant Singh Rajput Suicide Case

Aryan Khan Drug Case

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 19

Judicial remarks on media trial

The Press Council of India has expressed that

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 20

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 21

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 22

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 23

RTI & Media Law Assignment Page | 24

You might also like