Unethical, Immoral and Unfair Trials By ‘Media Court Rooms’

1st October, 2024 - 6:11 am Categories: News & Updates 0 Comments

INTRODUCTION WITH CONCEPTUAL BACKGROUND

The press in India dates back to 1780 when the Bengal Gazette was published at Serampore.[1] The press played a vital role in India’s freedom struggle, functioning as a crusading agent for the independence of our country. It is “the fourth and indispensable cornerstone of democracy, without which the very essence of a democratic system would be compromised”.[2] The media, through its groundbreaking sting operations, has unveiled numerous corrupt individuals and criminals and continues to play an important part in creating, moulding and reflecting public opinion in India.

Unfortunately, the media has succumbed to the burden of fast-paced coverage bestowed upon it, which is evident in its practice of conducting media trials. Media trial, a term that gained popularity in the late 20^th and early 21^st century[3], is a form of partial discourse where an individual is labelled as guilty even before undergoing a trial or receiving conviction from the Hon’ble court of justice.  Media trial is an absolute threat to personal liberty protected under Article 21[4], as the accused often find themselves without a fair opportunity to present their case before the masses that pounce upon every opportunity to voice their opinion, leading to their privacy being violated, again protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This unjust treatment can lead to irreversible damage to their entire career, fuelled by the prejudice formed against them.

UNETHICAL, IMMORAL, UNFAIR

“The media’s the most influential and powerful entity on earth. They have the potency to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses.” said Malcolm X, a human rights activist[5]. “Media freedom is fundamental to the life of an individual in a democratic polity; the media is one of the vital pillars of a free society and is an instrument of social and political change.”[6] With this potency comes responsibility, bringing the media’s competence to do justice with this power to the forefront.

Hon’ble ex-CJI NV Ramana underlined, “Media is running kangaroo courts and agenda-driven debates”[7] are not good for democracy at all. The jurisprudence of the Criminal Justice System of India is based upon the fundamental notion that every individual is considered innocent till the time he gets proved guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. However, this pattern of trial by media does not stand on that yardstick but hastily brands an individual as a criminal at a very initial stage without any authority. The practice violates the right of the ‘victim’ assured under Articles 129 and 215 of the Indian Constitution to a fair trial, as it establishes guilt so abruptly, which is not consonant with the principles of justice and comprehensive scrutiny.

Media trials fail to adhere to ethical standards, often descending to such depths that they involve disclosing private information about the accused, in the guise of breaking news, to gain traction and monetary profits, generally rated by TRP. This reprehensible practice aims to portray the case against the accused as justified, by resorting to such tactics, the media tries to persuade the public to generally have a conservative opinion of the individual in question, fostering intense animosity towards the supposed ‘criminal’ and tarnishing their image in the eyes of the public, especially when the case is of someone well known.

As seen in the case of Aryan Khan, WhatsApp messages appeared purporting to show him discussing a drug-sharing arrangement with two people, which were later proved to be false, showing the poor conduct of a segment of the media. As rightly quoted by Ruby Ahuja, a senior lawyer at Karanjwala & Company and a member of Aryan’s legal team, “The media must comprehend that they are dealing with someone’s life and liberty. We must recognise that the outcome of cases is determined by reasonable court judgments, and any attempt by the media to generate an expectation of a specific conclusion is incorrect. Society may anticipate a certain conclusion that the courts may not deliver. The media’s attempt to sway public opinion is not a healthy practice.”[8]

The vice-versa also happens when, instead of trying to forcefully point towards an opinion, the media presents an event based on the sentiments of the public. One such historical case was that of K.M. Nanavati[9], in which K M Nanavati was accused of murdering his wife’s lover, Prem Ahuja. When Nanavati came to know of his wife’s affair with Ahuja, he went in a rage into Ahuja’s bedroom where he shot the man dead. He then surrendered before the police saying he had committed the act under sudden and grave provocation. Such was the feeling built up by the press coverage that the jurists felt compelled to return a judgment that would meet the expectations of the masses. Thus, the jury returned a verdict acquitting Nanavati.”. But the Bombay High Court intervened and set aside the verdict given by the jury to give him a life sentence.

Trial by media places significant strain on the investigating agency, potentially leading to inadequate investigations and premature conclusions merely to expedite case closure. Numerous instances exist where law enforcement agencies have coerced innocent individuals into falsely confessing to crimes even though they were innocent. In certain instances, individuals labelled as ‘criminals’ by the media, who hail from the lower socio-economic strata and lack the financial means or influence to secure proficient legal representation, have experienced physical mistreatment while in custody. This unwarranted duress has led them to false confessions of crimes they never committed, just to save them from further torture and humiliation. Such a scene violates their right to fair and impartial trial. A fine example of it is the murder case at Ryan International School where media mounted pressure on the law enforcement agency, which eventually led to the forced interrogation and false confession of an innocent bus conductor Ashok Kumar. Without any evidence, Kumar was termed as the accused by the media very quick, which costs him his fundamental right to a fair trial. Further investigations by the CBI found that the real culprit was no other than a 16-year-old schoolmate student and cleared Kumar of all links with the crime.[10]

The high-profile case involving the late Sushant Singh Rajput also serves as a prominent illustration, where the media court houses pre-emptively pronounced their judgment, convicting Rhea Chakraborty of her boyfriend’s murder, doing irreversible damage to her entire career and also exerting pressure on the investigating agencies.

LAMENTABLE PERORATION

Freedom of the press was developed in light of the Constitution through the cases of Cross Road Newspaper, Organizer Newspaper and Bharati Press, but it is pertinent to note that in the present scenario media houses are exploiting this right, taking this into account, The Law Commission of India, in its 200th report titled “Trial by Media: Free Speech versus Free Trial under Criminal Procedure (Amendment to Contempt of Court Act, 1971)”[11], proposed a legal amendment aimed at prohibiting the media from reporting prejudicial information concerning the rights of the accused in criminal cases.

In the status quo, plenty is still to be done and though it is never argued that the freedom to publish news should be curtailed, the best solution, prudent to a reasonable person, would be to let the judiciary be of service. The apex court could lay down the foundation of some directions or mandatory adherence to guidelines without threatening the quality of reporting, but one which would narrow down media trials.

Author: Uday Pratap Singh, 2^nd Year BA.LLB Student at National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam (NLUJAA), in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at  Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.

REFERENCES

1. Mahotsav, A. Samachar Darpan, Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav, Ministry of Culture, Government of India. Available at: https://amritmahotsav.nic.in/district-reopsitory-detail.htm?25326 (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”
2. Influence of trial by media on the criminal justice system … Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/217234997.pdf (Accessed: 08 September 2024).
3. Malcolm X: The media’s the most powerful entity, Techactivist.org with Glen Ford (2018) The People’s Forum. Available at: https://peoplesforum.org/events/malcolm-x-the-medias-the-most-powerful-entity/#:~:text=Malcolm%20X%20said%20%E2%80%9CThe%20media’s,the%20enemy%20or%20the%20people%3F (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”
4. Jr, R.T.S. (2011) Law, Liberty and social justice. by P. B. Gajendragadkar. New York: Asia Publishing House, 1965. XVI, 159, index, bibliography. $6.00.: The Journal of Asian Studies, Cambridge Core. Available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-asian-studies/article/abs/law-liberty-and-social-justice-by-p-b-gajendragadkar-new-york-asia-publishing-house-1965-xvi-159-index-bibliography-600/B33EA1E6E9C4FA5808764F4BB83F8DFC (Accessed: 09 September 2024)
5. Network, L.N. (2022) ‘media running Kangaroo Courts, agenda-driven debates’ : CJI Ramana expresses concerns over campaigns against judges, Live Law. Available at: https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/media-running-kangaroo-courts-agenda-driven-debates-cji-ramana-expresses-concerns-over-campaigns-against-judges-204584?fromIpLogin=93829.63029518648 (Accessed: 09 September 2024). “
6. Media trial: Emphasis on aryan khan case (2022) The Amikus Qriae. Available at: https://theamikusqriae.com/media-trial-emphasis-on-aryan-khan-case/ (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”
7. Ghai, M. Why does the need for Reasonable Restrictions on the Freedom of the Press arise?, SCC online®. Available at: https://www.scconline.com/Members/NoteView.aspx?enc=SlRYVC05MDAxODY4OTMwJiYmJiY0MCYmJiYmU2VhcmNoJiYmJiZmdWxsc2NyZWVuJiYmJiZ0cnVlJiYmJiZSeWFuIEludGVybmF0aW9uYWwgU2Nob29sIG11cmRlciBjYXNlJiYmJiZBbGxXb3JkcyYmJiYmZ1NlYXJjaCYmJiYmZmFsc2U (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”
8. Mass media: Law commission of India India. Available at: https://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/cat_mass_media/ (Accessed: 09 September 2024). “

[1] “Mahotsav, A. Samachar Darpan, Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav, Ministry of Culture, Government of India. Available at: https://amritmahotsav.nic.in/district-reopsitory-detail.htm?25326 (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”

[2] D.D. Basu. Laws of the Press in India 244 (1980).

[3] “Influence of trial by media on the criminal justice system … Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/217234997.pdf (Accessed: 08 September 2024).”

[4] Constitution of India, 1950. Art. 21

[5] “Malcolm X: The media’s the most powerful entity, Techactivist.org with Glen Ford (2018) The People’s Forum. Available at: https://peoplesforum.org/events/malcolm-x-the-medias-the-most-powerful-entity/#:~:text=Malcolm%20X%20said%20%E2%80%9CThe%20media’s,the%20enemy%20or%20the%20people%3F (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”

[6] “Jr, R.T.S. (2011) Law, Liberty and social justice. by P. B. Gajendragadkar. New York: Asia Publishing House, 1965. XVI, 159, index, bibliography. $6.00.: The Journal of Asian Studies, Cambridge Core. Available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-asian-studies/article/abs/law-liberty-and-social-justice-by-p-b-gajendragadkar-new-york-asia-publishing-house-1965-xvi-159-index-bibliography-600/B33EA1E6E9C4FA5808764F4BB83F8DFC (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”

[7] “Network, L.N. (2022) ‘media running Kangaroo Courts, agenda-driven debates’ : CJI Ramana expresses concerns over campaigns against judges, Live Law. Available at: https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/media-running-kangaroo-courts-agenda-driven-debates-cji-ramana-expresses-concerns-over-campaigns-against-judges-204584?fromIpLogin=93829.63029518648 (Accessed: 09 September 2024). “

[8] “Media trial: Emphasis on aryan khan case (2022) The Amikus Qriae. Available at: https://theamikusqriae.com/media-trial-emphasis-on-aryan-khan-case/ (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”

[9] “KM Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962 SC 605”

[10]“ Ghai, M. Why does the need for Reasonable Restrictions on the Freedom of the Press arise?, SCC online®. Available at: https://www.scconline.com/Members/NoteView.aspx?enc=SlRYVC05MDAxODY4OTMwJiYmJiY0MCYmJiYmU2VhcmNoJiYmJiZmdWxsc2NyZWVuJiYmJiZ0cnVlJiYmJiZSeWFuIEludGVybmF0aW9uYWwgU2Nob29sIG11cmRlciBjYXNlJiYmJiZBbGxXb3JkcyYmJiYmZ1NlYXJjaCYmJiYmZmFsc2U (Accessed: 09 September 2024).”

[11] “Mass media: Law commission of India India. Available at: https://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/cat_mass_media/ (Accessed: 09 September 2024). “