Do we ever hear of Trial by Media, which ultimately prejudices the decision of courts? Does this practice allow in India? If so, what are the consequences of those media trials? This article will look into the aspect of media trials and the implications or areas affected by such media trials.

What is Media Trial?

Let us first understand what does Media Trail means? As per various reports, it can be observed that it describes the impact of the media houses such as Television channels, news reports, and other media coverage on a particular person’s case or over any victim or any accused of the case by establishing their identity or innocence or even the guilt. This coverage may be to show either positive or to establish the negativity of such person. Nonetheless, this kind of act by media would be termed as media trial and can easily prejudice the verdict or the parallel trial that happens before the court of law. This may happen before or after the court of law’s decision. In a famous case of RK Anand v. Registrar of Delhi High court, the Supreme court of India observed on media trial as “any kind of impact of media houses on any person’s reputation which creates a perception of either guilt or innocence in any verdict of court of law”.

PCI on Media Trail:

We know that there is an agency that has 90% of the shares of the news publication market in India, which ensures that there is fair and free media is published. One of the recent cases where PCI intervened to instruct the media houses was with respect to death controversy over Sushant Singh Rajput’s case. With respect to the same, the Press Council of India notified that all media houses should adhere to the rules and journalistic conduct while broadcasting the trial and investigation over the case and should at least ensure that they do not intervene while there is parallel investigation goes on. This is because of the fact that those media trials would prejudice the case that is in the court and would bring wrong notions among the public as well. This will also be a contempt of court.

It also noted that any debate or talk over the death by grabbing mere investigation lines by officials would never be promoted and is not desirable as well. This again, as per the Press council, shall undermine the norms of conduct and would become an added pressure on the trials and investigations as well.

Law Commission on Media Trial:

Having seen how the Press Council of India performs in the case of a Media trial, it is important to note that the law commission has discussed this issue under the topic of Trial by Media in its 200th Law commission report. In that special report, it has looked into several jurisdictions to know and acknowledge the balance that they have made in their laws while dealing with the criminal trials and media intervention such as publication, entertainment, etc. Chapter IX of that report specifically deals with the different categories of social media publications that are recognized as prejudicial or detrimental to the accused person. A few of such categories that have been highlighted in that report are as follows.

Firstly, and most importantly, the publications of the character of the accused person or any of his previous criminal records into the general public domain and the same have been termed to be contempt in many jurisdictions, including India.
Secondly, the publication of confessions. Some of the other categories included in the report are a publication of the photograph of the person, publication of any kind of comment on the ongoing case in the court through newspapers, etc., which has been on a serious note when it comes to media trial.

Media Trial: Right to Privacy and Article 19(1)(a):

Lastly, let us focus on the questions that we should ponder upon. Often, we hear contentions and arguments made by various media houses on their right to express all the necessary details. It is not incorrect, but before looking into their contentions, the main question that should be addressed is with respect to the contentions or ideas on the right to privacy over the media trial. As we know that, in the case of media trials, there is publication or publishing of trial information in different forms of media houses. This may range from the information of the parties, their families, identity, etc., to the kind of offenses and affected individuals. The question is, are we taking the rights of these parties lightly while comparing it with the freedom of speech, expression, and even the businesses of the media houses? If that is the case, it becomes very serious in terms of balancing both. Let us look into one of the important and ever-cited cases of R Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu and ors. In this case, Supreme Court observed that Article 21 includes the right to privacy within its ambit. The court referred to it as the ‘right to be left alone’ and observed that all citizens have the right to protect the privacy of themselves, their families, marriage, procreation, motherhood, etc. No one has the right to interfere in it or take cognizance over it by publishing the same in public. If any person does anything of such nature, then the same shall be a violation of the right to privacy. There is an exception to the above violation that if the information of the person is already present in the general public, then publishing that information shall not be a violation. But, that is not the scenario in most of the media trial cases in India.

As mentioned earlier, the media’s right to freedom of speech and expression shall be questioned, or many argue on this main ground. Both the rights should not be subsisted to each other and are valued equally. Article 19(1)(a) always supports the media when it comes to information and publication. But at the same time, they should not forget the innocence of the suspects or the accused person. So, there should be a balance between the two main rights, especially with respect to media trials.