This is an archive article published on January 18, 2021
‘Media trial’ impacts probe: Bombay HC on Sushant Singh Rajput media coverage
The court had reserved its judgment in November last year on public interest litigations (PILs) filed by eight former police officers from Maharashtra, activists, lawyers and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against “media trial” in the Sushant Singh Rajput death case.
The Bombay High Court Monday said a media trial during the investigation of any case violates program code under the Cable TV Network Regulation Act and does have an impact on the probe. The court ordered that the Press Council of India (PCI) guidelines will apply to electronic media along with print media till the time electronic media frame their own guidelines.
A bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish S Kulkarni passed its ruling on pleas filed by former police officers from Maharashtra, as well as activists, lawyers and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against “media trial” in the Sushant Singh Rajput death case.
The court held that the trial by media can interfere with the administration of criminal justice. The HC observed that some reporting by news channels like Republic TV and Times Now was “prima facie contemptuous”. The bench, however, refrained from initiating action against them.
The court also accepted the accusation that the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has “abdicated statutory functions” pertaining to regulations related to reporting on Sushant Singh Rajput death case.
The court held that media should avoid putting photographs of victims and accused as well as reconstructing the incident while the investigating is underway
The court had reserved its judgment in November last year on Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed by eight former police officers from Maharashtra, activists, lawyers and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against “media trials” in the Sushant Singh Rajput suicide case.
The court also accepted the accusation that the MIB has “abdicated statutory functions” pertaining to regulations related to reporting on the Sushant Singh Rajput death case.
Story continues below this ad
The court had asked the Centre on October 29 last year as to why it should not frame guidelines on media coverage of sensitive criminal matters and ongoing investigations, and whether “excessive” reporting by the press amounted to interference in the administration of justice under the Contempt of Courts Act.
The petitioners include former DGPs P S Pasricha, K Subramaniam, D Shivanandan, Sanjeev Dayal, Satish Chandra Mathur, and former Commissioners of Mumbai Police Mahesh N Singh, Dhananjay N Jadhav and former Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) chief K P Raghuvanshi.
The plea called out “anchors of some TV channels (that) have been virtually running a vituperative 24×7 campaign against Mumbai Police and its Commissioner, DCP of the zone and other officers by attacking them by name in most unbecoming manner.”
Further emphasising on the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the plea stated it is important in the criminal justice system in India but is “grossly violated by way of the media conducting its own trial and creating an atmosphere of prejudice.”
Story continues below this ad
The court disposed of the writ petitions stating that the findings were for the purpose of adjudication of the writ petitions and not on the subject matter.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
