Aastha Thakur
Published on: 24 September 2022 at 18:38 IST
The High Court of Kerala recently stated that the debates conducted by news channels are held without an understanding of the circumstances under which courts take such decisions as well as negligent of legal provisions applied by the courts.
Justice Ziyad Rahman AA deplored the actions of the media where the debates only convey the views and media trials of actual ongoing trials, missing out on actual news, and sometimes they give their verdict regarding the matter, concluding that the court should pass the same decision.
The Court examined that, “It is unfortunate that, in the debates in media (‘trials’), causes and issues are prejudged, and the verdicts are passed, expecting the courts to pass orders, sentencing the accused to the maximum, by following their declarations.”
“These so-called debates, claimed to be carried out to enlighten the public at large, convey their views (instead of news), without even fully knowing the nature of materials placed before the court, without properly understanding the circumstances under which the courts take decisions and unaware of the legal provisions and principles relied on/applied by the courts.”
The Court dismissed the transfer plea of the survivor in 2017 actress assault case, as it was observed that the media debates related to this case only created wrong perceptions which is currently ongoing.
The Court previously also pin pointed such approach of media in the same case when anticipatory bail was moved by one of the accused actors Dileep.
The matter heard by Single-Judge Justice Gopinath P opined that the media has discussed so much regarding this matter and also dissected court proceedings. Although free speech gives right to state your views but its not license for citizens having little understanding of judiciary to make remarks.
Justice Rahman stated that he agrees with Justice Gopinath and that the media, which acted recklessly, particularly while reporting the actress assault case, should leave the judiciary alone.
The order stated that, “I endorse the said observations wholeheartedly. Now, it’s time for introspection, it’s time to take the stock and it’s time to leave the justice delivery system alone, to do its job.”
“Although criticism is the backbone of democracy and the media is expected to do that, in this case, it is seen transgressed the limits of fairness, reasonableness and rationality,”
The court said that it is clear that the surviving actress had doubts about the entire process from the beginning while reviewing her transfer petition.
There are many instances of this, according to the court, who also noted that the prosecution and she had previously sought the court to request the transfer of the case and make accusations of prejudice against the Sessions Judge who is presently trying the case. The same was rejected by the court.
Nevertheless, even before submitting the instant transfer plea, the survivor had filed a motion with the court making accusations against the investigative team and asking for additional inquiry to be conducted under the court’s supervision.
After reviewing the claims made in the current transfer plea, the court decided it was appropriate to reject them because it determined that the information provided was insufficient to support the survivor’s suspicions of the Session Court Judge.
While doing so, the Court expressed its opinion that, despite the fact that the survivor appeared to have approached the situation with good faith, she appeared to have also fallen victim to the trial’s media coverage.
The Court said in its order that-
“Possibly, the frequent discussions and debates conducted and being conducted by various News Channels in connection with this case for several days and months created some wrong perceptions about the trial of the case, and it apparently influenced the general public at large, including the petitioner.”
“Though I do find that this petition is submitted by the petitioner with all bonafides, I have all the reasons to assume that she is a victim of such wrong perceptions and aspersions created by the media.”