Skip to main content
Sabrang
Sabrang
Rule of Law Media

Republic TV and Times Now reportage prima facie contemptuous: Bombay High Court

In the SSR media trial case, the court issued directions to be followed by the media while reporting but refrained from taking coercive action against the channels

Sabrangindia 18 Jan 2021

Image Courtesy:barandbench.com

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice GS Kulkarni of the Bombay High Court has held that the media coverage by Republic TV and Times Now against Mumbai police in the case pertaining to death of late actor Sushant Singh Rajput is prima facie contemptuous but refrained from taking any action.

According to Bar and Bench, the court observed that trial by media interferes with the criminal investigation by Police and issued a slew of directions to the media to be followed while reporting incidents involving suicide and death of persons.  

Disposing of a batch of PILs seeking regulation of media trial, the Bench laid down several guidelines on reporting on crime. Some of the guidelines pronounced by the Bench in the open Court are as follows:

  • Publishing a confession alleged to have been made by an accused as if it is an admissible evidence without letting the public know about its inadmissibility should be avoided;
  • While reporting suicide, to suggest that the person was of weak character, should be avoided;
  • Reconstructing of crime scenes, interviews with potential witnesses, leaking sensitive and confidential information should be avoided;
  • Investigative agencies are entitled to keep secrecy about the ongoing investigation and they are under no obligation to divulge information.

The High Court has also adopted the suggestion of Senior Advocate Arvind Datar regarding the appointment of a Public Information Officer by Police to give authentic information about criminal investigations, reported LiveLaw.

The Division Bench has also clarified that its findings and observations in the judgment are not a reflection on the pending investigations and the concerned criminal court should decide the issues uninfluenced by the observations.

In previous hearings on the matter of media trial by channels in relation to the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, the court had reportedly asked the Advocates representing Republic TV, “If you become the investigator, prosecutor and the judge, what is the use of us? Why are we here? Is this part of investigative journalism? Asking public about their opinion on who should be arrested? When a case is under investigation and the issue is whether it's a homicide or a suicide and a channel is saying it is murder, is that investigative journalism?”

The Bombay High Court today, on January 18 was pronouncing its verdict on a batch of petitions seeking guidelines for ethical reporting and responsible journalism, by all forms of media, especially at the investigation stage.

(To be updated with order)

Related:

Guilty as charged: Investigators, judge, jury and executioners of TV news ‘debates’
Right to free speech does not mean a licence to promote hate speech: Editors Guild of India
Delhi High Court tells Arnab Goswami to calm down and stop his media trials

Republic TV and Times Now reportage prima facie contemptuous: Bombay High Court

In the SSR media trial case, the court issued directions to be followed by the media while reporting but refrained from taking coercive action against the channels

Image Courtesy:barandbench.com

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice GS Kulkarni of the Bombay High Court has held that the media coverage by Republic TV and Times Now against Mumbai police in the case pertaining to death of late actor Sushant Singh Rajput is prima facie contemptuous but refrained from taking any action.

According to Bar and Bench, the court observed that trial by media interferes with the criminal investigation by Police and issued a slew of directions to the media to be followed while reporting incidents involving suicide and death of persons.  

Disposing of a batch of PILs seeking regulation of media trial, the Bench laid down several guidelines on reporting on crime. Some of the guidelines pronounced by the Bench in the open Court are as follows:

  • Publishing a confession alleged to have been made by an accused as if it is an admissible evidence without letting the public know about its inadmissibility should be avoided;
  • While reporting suicide, to suggest that the person was of weak character, should be avoided;
  • Reconstructing of crime scenes, interviews with potential witnesses, leaking sensitive and confidential information should be avoided;
  • Investigative agencies are entitled to keep secrecy about the ongoing investigation and they are under no obligation to divulge information.

The High Court has also adopted the suggestion of Senior Advocate Arvind Datar regarding the appointment of a Public Information Officer by Police to give authentic information about criminal investigations, reported LiveLaw.

The Division Bench has also clarified that its findings and observations in the judgment are not a reflection on the pending investigations and the concerned criminal court should decide the issues uninfluenced by the observations.

In previous hearings on the matter of media trial by channels in relation to the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, the court had reportedly asked the Advocates representing Republic TV, “If you become the investigator, prosecutor and the judge, what is the use of us? Why are we here? Is this part of investigative journalism? Asking public about their opinion on who should be arrested? When a case is under investigation and the issue is whether it's a homicide or a suicide and a channel is saying it is murder, is that investigative journalism?”

The Bombay High Court today, on January 18 was pronouncing its verdict on a batch of petitions seeking guidelines for ethical reporting and responsible journalism, by all forms of media, especially at the investigation stage.

(To be updated with order)

Related:

Guilty as charged: Investigators, judge, jury and executioners of TV news ‘debates’
Right to free speech does not mean a licence to promote hate speech: Editors Guild of India
Delhi High Court tells Arnab Goswami to calm down and stop his media trials

Related Articles

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

Theme

Taliban 2021

Taliban in Afghanistan: A look back

Communalism Combat had taken a deep dive into the lives of people of Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. Here we reproduce some of our archives documenting the plight of hapless Afghanis, especially women, who suffered the most under the hardline regime.
2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.
Delhi HC

Hate Speech and Delhi Pogrom 2020

A spate of provocative speeches, that amount to hate speech in law and should be prosecuted allowed blood letting to spill on the streets of north east Delhi in February-March 2020

Campaigns

Sunday

03

Jan

Pan-India

Saturday

05

Dec

05 pm onwards

Rise in Rage!

North Gate, JNU campus

Thursday

26

Nov

10 am onwards

Delhi Chalo

Pan India

IN FACT

Analysis

Taliban 2021

Taliban in Afghanistan: A look back

Communalism Combat had taken a deep dive into the lives of people of Afghanistan under the Taliban regime. Here we reproduce some of our archives documenting the plight of hapless Afghanis, especially women, who suffered the most under the hardline regime.
2020

Milestones 2020

In the year devastated by the Covid 19 Pandemic, India witnessed apathy against some of its most marginalised people and vilification of dissenters by powerful state and non state actors. As 2020 draws to a close, and hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers continue their protest in the bitter North Indian cold. Read how Indians resisted all attempts to snatch away fundamental and constitutional freedoms.
Migrant Diaries

Migrant Diaries

The 2020 COVID pandemic brought to fore the dismal lives that our migrant workers lead. Read these heartbreaking stories of how they lived before the pandemic, how the lockdown changed their lives and what they’re doing now.
Delhi HC

Hate Speech and Delhi Pogrom 2020

A spate of provocative speeches, that amount to hate speech in law and should be prosecuted allowed blood letting to spill on the streets of north east Delhi in February-March 2020

Archives