SEMINAR PAPER

ON

MEDIA LAW

“TOPIC: MEDIA TRIAL: AN ANALYSIS”

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:

MS. NANDINI BISWAS

AUTHOR:

ADITI RAGHUVANSHI

B.A.LL. B (ENERGY LAW)-B1

ENROLLMENT NO. R450216003

SAP ID: 500053930

 CONTENTS

1. ABSTRACT
2. MEDIA: THE FOURTH PILLAR OF DEMOCRACY
3. MEDIA VIS-À-VIS FAIR TRIAL
4. CONSEQUENCES OF MEDIA TRIAL
5. LAW COMMISSION REPORT
6. CONCLUSION
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY-
i. LIST OF CASES
ii. STATTUTES
iii. WEBSITES
iv. LEXICONS
 MEDIA TRIAL: AN ANALYSIS

The building blocks of any nation are its three working systems, that are, legislature, executive
and judiciary, but apart from them, there is another major system, the fourth pillar, media that
makes sure that the three machineries keep moving in a channelled form and that their public
accountability is assured to the public in a unbiased and a transparent manner. Media from the
early ages had been through a lot of evolution and has seen all different phases, there was a
time when media created fury among the people for their national movement, it gave the leaders
a platform for their voice, but over some decades media has took a revolution and it had spread
through different forms, online as well as offline. However, somewhere between this process,
media has transformed its role from providing unbiased information to passing judgments and
one-way opinions on anything and everything. Over the last few years, it has been a trend that
whenever a case comes up, media tends to circulate the story in their own manner due to which
mass gets affected, their opinions get affected and before the matter could be dealt legally, the
society has already formed its opinion on the same. Thus, apart from the legal trial, another
parallel that goes on is one conducted by media, wherein they place their own arguments
supposing themselves as the self-made advocates and judges of the case. The paper would
focus on the active role of the media, how it affects the public at large, effects of media formed
opinions on the police investigations and judicial proceedings. The paper would focus on the
recent case studies and how the media was involved in all of them through all stages.
 MEDIA: THE FOURTH PILLAR OF DEMOCRACY

Democracy a forum considered to respect and involve peoples’ opinion through their
represented electives, which grants them with the power to express their views and opinions
without any fear and exclusion. Here, comes the role of media to incorporate and disseminate
these opinions, discussions and debates on a mass level, so that the reliable information could
reach to all and thus media in our vote-based system is known as the Fourth Estate meaning in
this manner that it is as significant as other three known organs of the State for example
Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary. As Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution ensures
the right to speak freely of discourse and articulation thus, media has a firm hold in moulding
the popular assessment in any capacity it enjoys through its inclusion of occasions which was
additionally found in the Arushi murder instance of 2008.1 In few hours of the homicide,
different media men and journalists took on her home, altering everywhere throughout the
proof. The media strikingly publicized the report about the physical relationship of Aarushi
and the male home staff Hemraj and the relationship of her dad with a co-dental specialist.
Indeed, even as the examination started, a senior police authority told correspondents that
Aarushi was "characterless", which was utilized by columnists so much that the majority began
to accept the disputes of the media. The plenty of the media incited the preeminent court to
caution the media about the genuine inclusion of the case. Media is a column for a vote-based
democracy, as through the mechanism of broad communications thoughts crosswise over social
orders are conveyed; these thoughts are premise of interest and discussion. Associatively, the
opportunity of media has been perceived just as ensured by the Indian Constitution under
Article 19(1)(a) which is Right to freedom of speech. Indian media has evolved in all these
years, from being solely worked by the State to the arrangement by corporate who are to a great
extent observed as expert furthermore, impartial in their inclusion of the occasions. Post-
liberalization, the capability of media has improved to an extraordinary degree. In post 90's
media blast, numerous global news organizations like CNN, Bloomberg, TV 18 system and
BBC entered Indian media showcase and expanded the aggressiveness in the portion which
were previously secured by Doordarshan. This step came in result to the decision of the
Supreme Court in the case Secretary, Ministry of I and B v. Cricket Relationship of Bengal
(CAB)2 – court saw that legislature has no imposing business model on electronic media and a
native, under Article 19(1)(a) has right to broadcast and communicated to the watchers or the

1
Dr. Rajesh talwar and Another V. Central Bureau of Investigation, [2013] 82 ACC 303
2
1995 2 SCC 161.
audience through electronic media TV and radio any significant occasion. The administration
can force limitation on such right just on the grounds determined in clause 2 if Article 19 and
not on some other ground. State control on electronic media isn't referenced in clause 2 of
Art.19. The court gave certain directions so that an independent autonomous body could be set
up, resulting an independent regulatory body named Prasar Bharti was set up.3

As soon as it came into working, media was imbibed with a great deal of opportunity so that
unprejudiced, exhaustive and reasonable detailing should be possible on all the matters. The
Apex court in the case of Indian Express Newspaper v. Union of India mentioned the
accompanying objective facts "The expression “freedom of the press” has not been used in
Article 19 but is comprehended in Article 19(1) (a). The expression means freedom from
interference from authority which would have the effect of interference with the content and
circulation of the newspaper. There cannot be any interference in the name of ‘public interest’.
The purpose of press is to advance the public opinion by publishing facts and opinion without
which a democratic electorate cannot make responsible judgment. Freedom of press is the heart
of social and political intercourse. It is the primary duty of the court to uphold the freedom of
press and invalidate all laws and administrative actions which interfere with it contrary to the
constitutional mandate.”4

In the case of Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Manubhai5 J. Shah observed that the
“freedom of speech and expression” in Article 19(1)(a) means the right to express one’s
convictions and opinions freely, by word of mouth, writing, printing, pictures or electronic
media or in any other manner.” Vicious challenge is the present reality and same is valid for
Mass Media. Essential job is to address monetary contemplations, which are inferred through
promotion. Promotions are circulated on the stations dependent on their Television Rating
Points (TRPs). Due to the increased competition and need to stay significant, news systems
took up new activities for 'people in general on the loose'. While dominant part of media battle
is sure, job of media in insightful news-casting of matters pending preliminary is farfetched.

In the brutal rape case of Delhi broadly known as 'Nirbhaya gang rape case' the media took up
the job of a dissident yet has revealed instances of sexual offense inhumanely and without due
perseverance. One of the articles ‘trial and error’ has very precisely explained this: - “Part of
the legacy of the December 2012 Delhi gang rape is a newly activist media that is both a

3
Prasar Bharti Act 1990, w.e.f 23.11.1997.
4
(1985) 1 SCC 641.
5
1992 (3) SCC 637.
symptom and a cause of the increased public revulsion against such cases. Laudable as it may
be, this media activism is also disquieting, and not just because it might partially be fuelled by
a competitive rush to attract larger audiences. Even when well intentioned, recent coverage of
sexual violence has tended to degenerate rapidly into a series of trials by media, with the media
arrogating to itself and the public the powers of both judge and jury. As a consequence, the
media has chipped away at the already precarious agency of assault victims, and also
undermined the possibility of justice being delivered.6

MEDIA VIS-À-VIS FAIR TRIAL

By directing a parallel trial with the court, media regularly affects the opinions of the legal
organization of a nation by affecting the assessment of the judges. In some cases, extreme
attention is given to a blamed or suspect by media before the trial could start, an image is
created of the person even before the investigation and trial could conclude about the wrong
doing and the suspect. This outcomes in undue obstruction with the "organization of equity",
calling for procedures for disdain of court against the media. As of late, Justice Joseph said that
Media should assume a useful job in the advancement of the legitimate framework while
tending to a class on "Current Issues before the lawful calling and the legal executive". He
likewise said that media must exercise due consideration and alert while detailing criminal
issues to maintain a strategic distance from any sort of lack of respect to the Constitution and
the legal framework in the nation.

The press beholds the benefit of sitting in the Courts and observing the hearings for the benefit
of the overall population to keep them educated on issues of open significance. The columnist
in this manner has the right to go to procedures in Court and distribute reasonable reports. This
privilege is accessible in regard of Judicial and Quasi-Judicial courts.7 Although this right is
not absolute in nature. There are likewise other significant conditions, for example the
announcing of names of assault exploited people, kids, adolescent, lady ought to be disallowed.
This limitation is set as a result of their frail situation in the general public that makes them
powerless against misuse. In this way in light of a legitimate concern for equity, the court may
limit the attention of Court procedures. Under area 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, the

6
Supriya Roy’s, Trial and error, Caravan Magazine; available at
http://www.caravanmagazine.in/perspectives/trial-and-error . Last accessed at 6th October 2019.
7
Saroj Iyer v. Maharashtra Medical (Council) of Indian Medicine, A.I.R. 2002 Bom .95.
Court has the inborn capacity to arrange a preliminary to be held in camera. The privilege to
report authoritative procedures is likewise a piece of the press opportunity. In a law-based
society it is fundamental that the general public will be a piece of the exchanges on strategy
matters. They have to know the subtleties of discussions, as straightforwardness in
administration is a must for the correct working of a law-based society. This privilege of the
press to genuine announcing of parliamentary procedures is ensured by the Constitution.8

Despite the fact that, opportunity of press is basic, it can't be derived that aggregate right like
opportunity of press is more prominent than person rights like Right to Fair preliminary and
individual security. It is concurred that equity conveyance framework in our nations is slack
and media inclusion speeds up the procedure. Yet, it is submissively presented that the expected
job of news reports is to acquire matters the perspective on society and not to condemn blame
and honesty of people. In perspective on the broad utilization of the print and link benefits by
the media work force, the entire example of production of news has changed and greater part
of these productions are probably going to have biased effect on the general population, the
suspects, the charged, witnesses and even judges and most significantly, on the organization of
equity. India at present lives the evil reality where her media presents risk to the 'organization
of equity' which is the foundation of the statute of Natural Justice and the Rule of Law by
venturing past its limits and morals. It has sadly gone to a phase where the People are the sheep
and the media is the shepherd.

Each establishment is obligated to be mishandled, and each freedom, whenever left unbridled,
has the inclination to turn into a permit which would prompt issue and anarchy. 9 The media
has neglected to recognize the urgent line between accused and a convict which intuitively
stifles the working of the tenet of audi alteram partem, that is, to hear the opposite side. This
implies any individual who perhaps captured, legitimately has the right to be behind the bars
as a crook and the overall population will in general aimlessly accept the media dissonance and
turns out to be too restless to even consider letting the law follow all the way through. As
wonderfully commented by writer Dan Brown in his book-"Media is the right arm of turmoil".
Indian media specifically, has appeared as a 'Jan Adalat' or a 'Masses Court' as it keeps on

8
Article 361-A of the Constitution of India (1) No person shall be liable to any proceedings, civil or criminal, in
any Court in respect of the publication in a newspaper of a substantially true report of any proceedings of either
House of Parliament or the Legislative Assembly or as the case maybe, either House of the Legislature of a state,
unless the publication is proved to have been made with malice (2) Clause (1) shall apply in relation to reports or
matters broadcast by means of wireless telegraphy as part of any programme or service provided by means of a
broadcasting station as it applies in relation to reports or matters published in a newspaper.
9
Express Newspapers Vs. U.O.I., (1997) 1 SCC 133.
interceding the res sub judice. In light of this, the two brilliant standards of regular equity is
overlooked, that is, 'assumption of blamelessness until demonstrated liable' what's more,
'coerce past sensible uncertainty'. Presently, the media for gathering it famish for "Breaking
News" has received the pattern of undertaking a different examination, which develops open
assessment about the blamed even under the watchful eye of the court takes cognisance of the
case.

Another genuine and critical issue close by is the investment of the media in the inclusion of
thrilling violations, where they start to refer to the supposed "evidences" in the very starting,
even before the individual who is to arbitrate takes cognizance of the offense. This is heart-
breaking in light of the fact that the media isn't well stanza and not bound by the conventional
guidelines of referring to evidences that tell about what is and what isn't generous as a proof to
convict a charged. Along these lines, as a general rule, the Right to Justice is detracted from
the person in question. This sort of bargain of the Right to Justice can be seen when the media
treats a accused or common criminal equivalent to a prepared crook or a criminal, without
making any conceivable differentiation with satisfactory examination concerning the issue.
They are treated as 'Breaking News Items' keeping their notoriety and right to live with poise
in question. The electronic media which has arrived at each home presently puts the blamed on
preliminary and convicts them without allowing to opposite side coming about in to finish
destruction of character of the individual and notoriety of his family, what's more, there is no
real way to recover the equivalent even after acquittal from court as it would not be given the
equivalent or any exposure by the media. This implies regardless of whether they are vindicated
by the court, they stay liable according to general society and think that its hard to restore their
decent picture. It is to be called attention to that media trial has now converted to verdict by
media, which is certain the abuse of the opportunity and offense of their lawful breaking points.

In this way, the courts must take activities against such exercises by passing control orders
against the media. A few models can be referred to in this specific circumstance. It is featured
in situations where the charges of offense were marked against two previous Supreme Court
judges. One against Justice A.K. Ganguly where media had a field day and stayed at work
longer than required to devastate his notoriety and caused him to leave every one of the posts
which he was holding and disfavoured him before anything could be demonstrated against him.
Another case was that of Justice Swantantra Kumar confronting the comparable charge,
however as it were thus, for this situation he kept on heading Green Tribunal, while the issue
was still under examination. The distinction between the two cases was that, the principal thing
Justice Swantratra Kumar did was to get a stay against media preliminary from Delhi High
Court. Most would agree that media preliminary isn't just illicit however unethical too. The
media preliminary has direct effect on the working of examining organization as it works
compelled to capture the blamed without appropriate proof and lay the accuse sheet now and
then of insufficient confirmations to get away from the intrusive media weight. Subsequently,
the nature of examination is straightforwardly influenced and it has additionally got immediate
effect on working of legal executive too particularly in beginning periods like award of bail.

In the ongoing occasions, with the presentation of the idea of Target Rating Points or TRP,
news coverage works under extraordinary weight. TRP appraisals are the gross rating focuses
conveyed by a media source to a particular objective group of spectators. Preceding this, the
columnist had worked with uprightness, braveness and free from undue predisposition or
biased feelings. They didn't carry out the responsibility of naming individuals blameworthy or
a criminal without making a genuine and true-blue endeavour to ponder the charges and
exploring them, and reach self-governing resolutions. That is the explanation individuals
confided in them. Be that as it may, recently because of this harrowing strain to expand the
TRP scales, electronic media is seeing heartless challenge. So as to remain at the highest point
of their business, the electronic media had manifested into a forceful structure with a huge
number of camera flashes what's more, madness of crouching inquiries around the accused that
even the police can't take them from their vehicles to the courts and the other way around. So
as to expel this type of animosity, the Press Council of India issues rules and standards for
journalistic lead, and has prevailing with regards to making a move in specific cases. Other
than this, the Press Council of India even distributes conciliatory sentiments in specific cases.

The right to a fair trial emanates and is backed by certain constitutional provisions such as
Article 14, 20, 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. The conspicuous status of the Articles
2010, that is, Right to Protection in regard of conviction for offenses, and Article 2111, can be
comprehended from the way that these vital rights can't be suspended in any event, during an
Emergency, as referenced in the Constitution itself. Fair trial isn't absolutely private advantage

10
Protection in respect of conviction for offences:
(1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of the law in force at the time of the
commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have
been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once
(3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
11
Protection of life and personal liberty No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according
to procedure established by law.
for an accused – the publics' trust in the trustworthiness of the equity framework is essential.
The Apex Court explained fair trial in the case of Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of
Gujarat12, and stated that “Fair trial would obviously mean a trial before an impartial Judge, a
fair prosecutor and atmosphere of judicial calm. Fair trial means a trial in which bias or
prejudice for or against the accused, the witnesses, or the cause which is being tried is
eliminated.”

In setting to the previously mentioned guideline of 'Reasonable Trial', the arrangement of the
'24 Hour Principle' referenced under Article 22(2)13 of the Indian Constitution is of
extraordinary significance. It expresses that each individual who is captured and kept in
guardianship will be delivered, inside 24 hours, to the closest Magistrate. The capture of the
blamed is fixed to start with itself and this is supposing that any media distribution is made
after the capture, relating to the individual's character, past feelings or admissions (assuming
any), the individual's case will be biased and prejudicial even in the bail procedures when issues
emerge with respect to whether bail is to be allowed or dismissed, or as to what conditions are
to be forced and whether there is a requirement for police or legal remand. Such publications
may likewise influence the consequent preliminary that happens.

CONSEQUENCES OF MEDIA TRIAL

 Pressure on Lawyers:

One of the outcomes of media trial that goes plain is the huge measure of weight put on the
advocates to not take up the instance of the accused, in this manner constraining those accused
to go to trial without any defence, thus violating the principles of natural justice. Each
individual has an option to be legitimately represented to by an advocate of his choice and,
through the equivalent, put his point under the watchful eye of the settling court and nobody
can suspend him from doing as such. The weight on the advocates just increases once he has
chosen to advocate the accused for the charged (particularly in a sensitive case), he needs to
venture out with his notoriety. In an intriguing case, the media was scrutinizing the ethical
quality of praised senior legal advisor Mr. Smash Jethmalani in having acknowledged the brief

12
(2004) 4 SCC 158.
13
Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a
period of twenty four hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to
the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the
authority of a magistrate.
and for having showed up for blamed Manu Sharma in Jessica Lal Case, obviously neglecting
to comprehend its very own job and that of other partners in criminal equity framework. A
senior editorial manager of the TV news channel CNN-IBN called the choice to speak to
Sharma an endeavour to "protect the shaky". This was just a single case of the media-impelled
crusade against the accused.14 thus, one of the most commended attorneys of the nation Mr.
Gopal Subramaniam showed up for the benefit of the state and the case from Manu Sharma's
side was given over to an unremarkable legal advisor.

Legal counsellor and suspects aside, even the people in question and witnesses face over the
top exposure and intrusion of their protection. The people in question and their families, in
generally assault cases, have a troublesome time ensuring and hiding their characters with the
consistent provocation by the media. A few of the media houses go beyond the limits and even
make calls to the person in question or the observer in request to remove data identifying with
the case, yet at the expense of the security. The media moreover makes different issues for
observers. On the off chance that the character of the observer is distributed, it represents an
incredible threat of the observer going underweight both from the charged just as from the
police. At the soonest organize itself, the observers get undermined and attempt to withdraw
and escape the jumble. Witness insurance turns into a genuine loss in such circumstances.
Police are introduced in poor light by the media and their assurance endures, as well. As right
on time as a day after the report of wrongdoing is distributed, media flashes the news saying
that 'Police do not understand'. The weight on the police from media develops step by step and
arrives at a point where police is constrained attempt a hurried examination and once in a while
own 'announcements for shield' in broad daylight, to secure their notoriety and quiet the sully
continuous fuss. A few models can be given. In 'Vote for Cash' scam where the charges were
marked against certain Members of Parliament for interest of fix for democratic for Manmohan
Singh government. A few Members of Parliament were captured and the charge sheets were
laid in rush to get away from the media weight, however later on the court released them on
grounds of not discovering enough proof to try and edge charges prior to the trial.

 Effect on Judges:

There have been numerous complaints against the media previously, yet of the significant
claims on 'Media Trial' is of prejudicing the judges directing a specific case. There is a
distinction of assessment between the Americans and the Anglo-Saxons with respect to this

14
Retrieved from http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRF164.htm on 8th October, 2019.
issue. While the previous accept that Judges are not at risk to be affected by media distribution,
the last are of the view that Judges may even now be intuitively impacted by such productions.
The Supreme Court in State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi15 held that a trial
by press, electronic media or by method of public agitation is the counter proposal of guideline
of law and can prompt unnatural birth cycle of equity and a Judge is to monitor himself against
such 'weight'. There is constantly an extraordinary probability that the streaming demeanour of
comments made upon a particular contention, makes a general viewpoint about the case, and
thus the judge managing the preliminary may curve to such popular feeling.

The media shows the case in such a way to the open that if a judge passes a request against the
"media decision", the individual is esteemed either as degenerate or one-sided. In Anukul
Chandra Pradhan v. Association of India16, the Supreme Court observed that "No occasion
should arise for an impression that the publicity attached to these matters has tended to dilute
the emphasis on the essentials of a fair trial and the basic principles of jurisprudence including
the presumption of innocence of the accused unless found guilty at the end of the trial" Judges
get affected by the allegations marked in print media and electronic media and the denounced
are nearly treated as convicts and even the fundamental rights like right to be allowed bail are
denied. The reality of the undue impact of the media ought to be enveloped by Section 2(c) of
the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 that states, "Prejudices or interference or tend to interfere
with due course of any judicial proceeding’ as an act of contempt."

Previously very few people took interest into the Court systems and the cases documents in
that. Be that as it may, in the last decade, there is a developing and extreme spotlight on the
Courts and its cases. Regardless of whether announced in every day paper or in electronic
media, Indians excitedly eat up this data, since they have turned out to be interested about what
occurs in Court. Accordingly, the Courts have certainty gone under the 'infinitesimal watch' of
the media. There are two outcomes to this – Positive and Negative. The Positive side-effect of
this is more and more Indians become mindful of their sacred rights, than they were ever
previously. It is for this explanation that the media unequivocally hates the Rule of sub judice.
The sub judice principle manages the distribution of issues which are getting looked at by the
court and production of material which is sub judice involves scorn of court, a wrongdoing
which is deserving of a fine or potentially detainment. The press whines that Courts over the
span of a consultation will in general translate the sub judice standard in a stringent way to

15
1997 (8) SCC 386.
16
1996(6) SCC 354.
restrict any dialog of the issues under the watchful eye of the Court, regardless of whether they
require open consideration. There is, along these lines, a need to sensibly change the sub judice
rule, conjuring it just in instances of an undeniable aim to impact the preliminary and not to
any demonstration that may have the slim chance of impacting it.

LAW COMMISSION REPORT

The Forty Second Law Commission analysed the different parts of right to security under
Chapter 23 of its 42nd Report and prescribed for addition of another section to be designated
"offenses against protection" to substitute the existing part XIX making unapproved
photography and utilization of fake tuning in or recording device and distributing such data
tuned in or recorded as offences.17 The Law Commission in its one hundredth and fifty 6th
report expressed that privilege to security is a tremendous subject and its extension has been
augmented impressively under Article 21 of the Constitution by the Supreme Court under its
different decisions.18 The Law Commission conceded that on contemplating the matter of
security as reached out under Article 21 of the Constitution and furthermore in the different
reports of outside law commissions, it would prescribe that these offenses can't suitably be
joined in the IPC. Along these lines it expressed that the proposal of its 42nd Report to
incorporate 'Offense against protection' is erased and that a different enactment ought to be
there to exhaustively manage such offenses against security.

In the Law Commission's 200th report19 Justice M. Jagannadha Rao expressed that at present
under segment 3(2)20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with the clarification there
under, gives full invulnerability to distributions regardless of whether they preferentially
meddle with the course of equity in a criminal case, if by the date of production, a charge sheet,
or challan isn't recorded or if request or warrant are not given. Such productions would be
disdain just if a criminal continuing is pending. The contest in regards to when the case is said
to be 'pending' had caused a great deal of discussion. The report expressed that Indian Supreme
Court holds production, biased after 'arrest' as criminal scorn. It was settled in A.K. Gopalan21

17
Law Commission of India forty second Report on the Indian Penal Code ,1971, Chapter 23, pp.336-340.
18
Law Commission of India one hundred and fifty sixth Report on the Indian Penal Code vol.1 August, 1997,
p.340.
19
200th Report on Trial by Media; Free speech and Fair Trial Under Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, August 31st
2006 – Justice M. Jagannadha Rao http://Law Commission of India.nic.in/reports/rep200. pdf. p. 223., retrieved
on 4.6.09.
20
Section 3- Innocent publication and distribution of matter not contempt.
21
A.K. Gopalan v. Noodeen 1969 (2) S. C. C.734.
wherein the Supreme Court expressed that it is from the purpose of capture that scorn emerges.
This report likewise concurs with this choice. India is signatory to the Madrid Principles on the
Relationship between the Media and Judicial independence 199422, wherein the fundamental
guideline expressed was that despite the fact that it is the capacity and right of the media to
assemble and pass on data to the open and to remark on the organization of equity, including
cases previously, during and after trial, it ought to be managed without abusing the rule of
assumption of honesty. In this manner the measuring stick is whether media revealing has
damaged the fundamental rule that an accused is innocent till the time proven guilty.

CONCLUSION

Based on the exploration work, it tends to be that seen that news-casting in India has been
clobbered by a spate of deceptive media preliminaries in the ongoing occasions and this danger
happens under the falsification of legitimate exercise of Freedom of Speech. Up until now, the
State and Judiciary have just succumbed to its destructive impacts and have consistently,
neglected to check this marvel as Media can't be overlooked for its positive job in a majority
rules system like India, however now and again like these, it must be portrayed as a ' Devil in
Disguise'. The media has an onus in guaranteeing that everybody is heard paying little heed to
status in the progressive system of intensity, however without legitimate component to
authorize the rules under which it should work, it assumes control over the job of both the
researching organization just as the court and causes unnatural birth cycle of equity on a few
events. It plays the job of the agent and adjudicator, coming about in the dis-balance in the
organization of equity. Be that as it may, now and again these ultra vires exercises are
surprisingly positive turn of events as there is inappreciable exertion alongside the progressive
sting tasks as it keeps a nearby watch over the examinations and exercises of police
organization and official. However, at the same time, media should acknowledge the way that
whatever they distribute has an incredible effect over the observer.

Suggestions and Recommendations:

1. The job of media must be limited to verifiable detailing of cases and not building
general assessment either in the support of denounced or complainant in case it causes

22
Madrid Principles on the Relationship between the Media and Judicial Independence – convened by the
International Commission of Jurists in Madrid from 18-20Jan.1994.
 the unnatural birth cycle of equity, and the job of media ought to be observed intently
and praiseworthy discipline ought to be given for deviations from the equivalent.
2. There must be a sensible self-confinement over its field and due accentuation ought to
be given to the reasonable preliminary. Also, court systems must be regarded with
sufficient awareness of other's expectations.
3. Media experts should be cautious and give most extreme consideration and truthfulness
before transforming a pending legal investigation into a media trial.
4. The presumptions or speculations that media houses allege shall also be subject some
reasonable restrictions or else in the present regime of cut throat regime, media would
continue to make profits while neglecting the fact that they are not their to declare
decisions.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

List of Cases:

1. Dr. Rajesh Talwar and Another V. Central Bureau of Investigation [2013] 82 ACC 303
2. Secretary, Ministry of I and B v. Cricket Relationship of Bengal (CAB) 1995 2 SCC
161
3. Indian Express Newspaper v. Union of India (1985) 1 SCC 641
4. Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Manubhai 1992 (3) SCC 637
5. Saroj Iyer v. Maharashtra Medical (Council) of Indian Medicine, A.I.R. 2002 Bom .95
6. Express Newspapers Vs. U.O.I., (1997) 1 SCC 133
7. Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004) 4 SCC 158
8. State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi 1997 (8) SCC 386
9. Anukul Chandra Pradhan v. Association of India 1996(6) SCC 354
10. A.K. Gopalan v. Noodeen 1969 (2) S. C. C.734

Statutes:

1. The Constitution of India, 1950

2. Prasar Bharti Act 1990
3. Law Commission of India forty second Report on the Indian Penal Code ,1971, Chapter
23, pp.336-340.
4. Law Commission of India one hundred and fifty sixth Report on the Indian Penal Code
vol.1 August, 1997, p.340.
 5. 200th Report on Trial by Media; Free speech and Fair Trial Under Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973, August 31st 2006 – Justice M. Jagannadha Rao

Websites:

1. Supriya Roy’s, Trial and error, Caravan Magazine; available at

http://www.caravanmagazine.in/perspectives/trial-and-error
2. http://www.hrdc.net/sahrdc/hrfeatures/HRF164.htm
3. Media on trial, by Sudhanshu Ranjan, published on January 26, 2007,
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1460248.cms?utm_source=contentofin
terest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst
4. Media as the Fourth Pillar of Democracy, published on November 29, 2018,
https://blog.ipleaders.in/media-as-a-fourth-pillar-of-democracy/
5. Freedom of Press: Fourth Pillar Of Democracy, published on December 19, 2014
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/freedom-press-pillar-democracy/
6. Media Trial vis-à-vis Justice, Published on December 2, 2016, by Adv. Jhankruti C.
Badani, https://legalvoiceblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/02/media-trials-vis-a-vis-
justice/
7. Fair Trial, Free Press and the Man in the Middle, Evelle J. Younger, American Bar
Association Journal, Vol. 56, No. 2 (FEBRUARY 1970), pp. 127-130, Published
by: American Bar Association, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25725039
8. Media Trial: Freedom of Speech VS. Fair Trail, by Devika Singh and Shashank Singh,
http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol20-issue5/Version-
4/N020548894.pdf
9. Constitutionality of Media Trials, Rebecca Furtado , published on July 1, 2016,
https://blog.ipleaders.in/constitutionality-media-trials/
10. Effect of Trial by Media Before Courts, published on 02/02/2018,
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/commercial-law/effect-of-trial-by-media-
before-courts-law-essay.php
11. Impact of the Media on Fair Trial Rights: Panel on Media Access,
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1038&context=iplj
12. Freedom of the press and fair trial, published on May 17, 2010, The Hindu,
https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/Readers-Editor/Freedom-of-the-press-and-fair-
trial/article16301300.ece
 13. Media Trials: The Escalating Influence on Judiciary, by Rashmi Rawat, Published on
25 July, 2018, https://www.myadvo.in/blog/media-trials-the-escalating-influence-on-
judiciary/
14. How "Trial by Media" Can Undermine the Courtroom, by Romeo Vitelli, published on
Aug 22, 2018, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/media-spotlight/201808/how-trial-
media-can-undermine-the-courtroom
15. Law Commission of India 200th Report on Trial By Media, Free Speech and Fair Trial under
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, published on August 2006,
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/rep200.pdf

Lexicons:

1. http://www.manupatrafast.in/ipAccess.aspx
2. https://www.scconline.com/
3. https://www.lexisnexis.com/