History and Impact of Media Trial in India

 

                                                                  Source: iPleaders

In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the phrase "Trial by Media" was commonly used to describe the impact of newspaper and television coverage on a person's reputation by creating a widespread impression of guilt regardless of a court's ruling.

History of Media Trial:

The Press Regulations, enacted by Lord Wellesley in 1799, were the first statute to place restrictions on the burgeoning newspaper publishing industry. In 1813, Lord Hasting's administration loosened the regulations. Following the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857, the government forbade the publication of seditious materials and punished printers and publishers who disobeyed with severe penalties. Lord Ripon was appointed as Viceroy in 1880.

When Ripon assumed office, one of his initial responsibilities was to repeal the unpopular measure. With the foundation of the Indian National Congress (INC), newspapers adopted a more assertive stance, resulting in a confrontation between the media and the government, which led to the enactment of increasingly restrictive legislation aimed at limiting press freedom. Following the conclusion of World War II, discussions on the transfer of power commenced, and the majority of media prohibitions were relaxed. Following independence and the adoption of the Constitution, press freedom in the country has increased. Even during the 1975 emergency, the press was restricted severely.

In "Romesh Thapar v. the State of Madras" and countless subsequent decisions, the Legislative powers to repeal the privilege granted by Article 19(1)(a) were severely constrained. In the case of Express Newspapers Ltd v. UOI, it was determined that the technique and manner by which a limitation is imposed must also be equitable, fair, and sensible. The Supreme Court elaborated in great length on journalistic freedom but found that it, like other liberties, is subject to reasonable restrictions.

Free Trials and Free Media:

The foundation of "freedom of the press" is the right of citizens in a democracy to participate actively in events that affect them. People cannot influence decisions that affect their livelihoods unless they have adequate knowledge of the essential facts and rationale. A significant portion of this fact-finding and deductive reasoning must be conducted in the shadows, with the public press functioning as a major instrument.

Also, for this reason, investigative and political journalism is essential. The Indian Constitution and the Contempt of Courts Act of 1971 protect the "right to a fair trial." It is prohibited to discuss or publish information regarding the merits of a case pending before a court.

The issue is not with the media exposing a fault in a police investigation or the inability of government employees to do their duties; rather, the issue is with the media stepping outside of its legal authority and doing what is not permitted. Publicizing sub-judice issues jeopardizes the integrity of judicial proceedings and the "right to life with dignity" of the accused. The media has reinvented itself as a "public court" (Janta Adalat).

It completely disregards the essential distinction between an accused and a convicted individual. The golden standards of innocence until proven guilty and guilt beyond a reasonable doubt are disregarded. The purpose of the media is to report the truth and news and to emphasize public problems, not to pass judgment.

Impact of the Media on the Accused:

If the media depicts a suspect or accused as if he has already been proven guilty before the court hearing, the accused may be subject to significant bias. Even if the individual is finally released after going through the correct legal systems, this may not be enough for him to regain his damaged reputation in society.

Overwhelming media coverage depicting him as someone who must have committed the crime constituted inappropriate interference with the "administration of justice," prompting contempt of court proceedings against the press/media.

Impact of the Media on the Witness:

If the identities of witnesses are made public, both the accused and his associates, as well as the authorities, may exert pressure on them. At this moment, the witnesses wish to withdraw and leave the turmoil. Witness protection is severely compromised as a result. This raises the question of whether hostile witness testimony is admissible and whether the law should be altered to restrict witnesses from changing their statements.

Impact of Media on Judges and the Legal System:

Judges are not immune to criticism, whether for their judicial or private behavior. However, there is cause for concern when criticisms of them are false or ill-informed, as this could weaken public confidence in the legal system. A judge must shield himself from the pressure that a media source can exert on judges or juries, and if judges, as fellow humans, are susceptible to such indirect impacts, at least subconsciously or unknowingly.

In "State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi," the Supreme Court ruled that a trial by electronic media, press, or public activism violates the "rule of law" and can result in a miscarriage of justice. The law regarding contempt of court distinguishes between civil and criminal contempt. There are three distinct types of criminals: those who scandalize, those who prejudice trials, and those who impede the administration of justice.

Evaluation of Media Trial:

In a democratic society, the role of the media is crucial. Each of the democratic pillars should be completely autonomous and not interfere with the activities of others. In high-profile criminal trials such as those involving Indrani Mukerjee, Jessica Lal, and others, the media has violated the sanctity of the judiciary. Due to the participation of the media, several of the accused have been released.

Conclusion:

The media has a broader audience and a more effective and pertinent method of communicating with the public. For this reason, it is referred regarded as a fundamental element of society. The media should frequently serve as the society's alter ego, accurately expressing its attitude, feelings, and concerns, as well as covering national good events. It is vital to provide context and evaluate the benefits and downsides of the information for people to comprehend their significance and form informed conclusions.

Written by: Chitraksh Mayank