Media restraint must in ongoing cases: Bombay HC – Times of India

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Monday, in a significant judgment on a clutch of PILs against “sensationalism” by broadcast media in the coverage of death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, said the media should restrain itself and “avoid or regulate” its coverage and debates and discussions during ongoing criminal investigations of cases.
The media should convey what is “informative, but in public interest, instead of what according to the media the public is interested in,” it directed. It said media must “avoid character assassination” while reporting on suicides.
The HC said “trial by media interferes with administration of justice” and amounts to contempt of court.
Significantly, the HC held “police are not obliged to divulge” information, especially one sensitive to the case being investigated.
Avoid interviews with victims, witnesses & kin, HC tells media
We have considered it appropriate to remind investigation agency to maintain secrecy and not divulge information,” said the bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish Kulkarni.
The HC also held that the “Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has abdicated its statutory function”. Senior counsel Devadatt Kamat, for one of the petitioners, had argued that duty includes the power to cancel the licence of broadcasting houses in extreme cases of violation of programme code. The HC held ‘media trial’ is also a violation of programme code that governs news channels.
The HC said Mumbai police should consider appointing a nodal officer to brief media on developments in major cases, as suggested by senior counsel Arvind Datar who had appeared for the News Broadcasting Association (NBA).
The HC set out guidelines for media reporting, especially in cases of death by suicide, and said media must restrain from reporting or airing discussion that would obstruct administration of justice or lay bare the privacy of the accused or victim. “No report, discussion, debate or interview should be presented by the press or media which could harm the interest of the accused being investigated or the witness in the case… with a view to satiate the stealing of march over competitors.” The HC said, “Accordingly we direct the press, media to exercise restraint and refrain from printing or displaying any news item and or initiating any discussion or debate in ongoing crime scene investigations including in cases of suicidal deaths.”
The HC said media must avoid doing interviews with victims, witnesses or any other family members. It must also “avoid analyzing statements whose evidence will be vital during trial, publishing confessions made to police by an accused and trying to make people believe that it is a piece of evidence which is admissible before a court… without letting the public know the nitty gritty of the Evidence Act.” Media ought not use “photographs of accused and thereby facilitating their identification, criticizing the investigation agency… pronouncing on the merits of the case…recreating or reconstructing of a crime scene and depicting how the accused committed the crime, predicting the proposed or future course of action that ought to be taken in a particular direction to complete the investigation and leaking sensitive and confidential information from material collected by the investigating agency,” said the 253-page judgment.
The PILs were filed by eight former top cops of Mumbai police including MN Singh, filmmaker Nilesh Navlakha, a voluntary body called, In Pursuit of Justice, Advocate Asim Sarode and Prernaa Arora. The excops had contended news channels were unfairly critical of Mumbai police’s probe into the actor’s death. Navlakha’s PIL also sought orders for broadcasters to comply with the programme code.
The HC did not accept a suggestion to stay for 15 days any order passed by the government against a channel, saying if the court allows it, it would be entering in the realm of legislation. The HC, by its judgment, disposed of four PILs and dismissed one. The HC said while the Press Council of India (PCI) has guidelines for print media on reporting of suicide cases, which are not per se binding on electronic media, till such time guidelines are framed for broadcast media, they should adopt the PCI guidelines “in letter and spirit”. The HC framed and answered five legal questions, one of which was “whether media trial in respect of matters pending investigation of criminal complaint or within whether the regime of self-regulation adopted by TV news channels would have any sanctity in statutory framework.” “The answer is in the negative,” said the HC.