Supreme Court remarks on media: Five times news reporting came under court scanner

Saying that media trials influence public opinion and prejudice cases before judicial decisions, he also noted that news channels often host debates driven by specific agendas, not facts, making it difficult for judges to remain impartial and undermining the justice system.

Drawing a sharp contrast between the print and electronic media, he said that the print media has “some accountability” while electronic media has “zero accountability,” where false narratives vanish, but the damage to the judiciary and democracy persists. He advised the media to “self-regulate and measure their words”.

Rujira Banerjee Case

Calcutta high court in 2023 had directed the ED to not disclose the details of investigation in a money laundering case against Rujira Banerjee, wife of Trinamool Congress MP, Abhishek Banerjee before filing the chargesheet. The order came after she told the court that her reputation is damaged by the leaks to media by the ED.

In 2024, the Supreme Court had refused to entertain a plea by the agency against guidelines imposed by the high court. The HC had also asked the media to report objectively and fairly.

Banerjee accused the probe agencies of selective leaks to hurt her family’s reputation and that such leaks affected her privacy and denied her a fair trial.

Sensationalism

In cases related to Aarushi Talwar murder and actor Sushant Singh Rajput death case, courts have passed strictures against the media for sensational news. The Bombay High Court highlighted how news channels made insensitive and disparaging comments, which undermined the concept of a free and fair trial.

In 2023, a bench comprising the then CJI DY Chandrachud citing the Arushi Talwar case, observed that media trials may result in “deflection of cause of justice”. The court, calling for “urgent need for a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) about how journalists should be briefed”, the bench directed the union home ministry to prepare a comprehensive manual on how police should brief journalists about criminal cases.

“The guidelines must ensure that disclosure does not result in a media trial so as to allow prejudging of the accused. Media trials are liable to result in deflection of cause of justice by impacting upon the evidence which should be adduced and its assessment by adjudicating authorities,” the bench said.

Contempt against journalist

The Madras High Court in 2022 initiated contempt proceedings against Savukku Shankar, a journalist for a post on social media platform ‘X’ against Justice GR Swaminathan. Justice Swaminathan directed registration of a suo motu case of contempt.

The court said that Shankar was “unsparing in his attack on individuals and institutions including the judiciary”.

“While even strident criticism is permissible, defamatory vilification is not. He has been focusing his gaze on me for the last several months. He has commented on many of my judgements in the most uncharitable language,” the court said.

Anchor’s Role

While hearing a batch of pleas seeking direction for steps against hate speech incidents in 2022, a bench of Justices K M Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy and observed that it if the duty of news anchors to ensure that guests invited to the show don’t indulge in hate speech. The court said the role of anchor in the TV channel debate is “very important” and “critical” and that TV channels which often give space to hate speech escape without any sanctions.

“Role of the anchor is very important. These speeches are on mainstream media or social media that is unregulated. Mainstream TV channels still hold sway. The role of the anchor is critical. The moment you see somebody going into hate speech, it is the duty of the anchor to immediately see that he doesn’t allow that person,” said Justice Joseph.