SC Annoyed over “Media Trials,” Asks Centre to Frame Guidelines for Police for Media Briefing

Manas Dasgupta

NEW DELHI, Sept 13: Taking strong exception to “media trials” particularly in relation to the crime investigation, the Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the government to prepare guidelines for police to follow during press briefings especially in sensitive cases, while protecting the sanctity of the investigation and the rights of both the accused and the victim.

Referring to “biased reporting (that) gives rise to public suspicion the person has committed an offence” – the SC  directed the Union Home Ministry to prepare a detailed manual for the police in media briefing in relation to criminal cases within three months.

The top police officers of each state and the National Human Rights Commission have been directed to submit suggestions to the home ministry within a month and the next hearing will be in January, a bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said, underlining the need to sensitise police personnel.

The bench said the police briefings should be tailored to the necessities and peculiarities of each individual case. Care should be taken to avoid police briefings to pave the way for media trials which pre-determine the guilt of an accused. A person is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

Biased reportage harm the reputations of both the accused and the victims. It may moreover derail the investigation. “The right to privacy is also a casualty,” the Court noted. The Bench said the previous manual was over a decade old. Amicus curiae, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranaraynan said there has since been sweeping changes on the ground brought about mainly by the advent of social media. The Court agreed that it was important to balance the right to information, the rights of fair trial, competent investigation and the right to privacy and dignity of the accused and the victim involved in a case.

“Administration of justice is affected by ‘media trials’. Need to decide at which stage (of investigation) details should be disclosed. This is a very important issue because it involves interests of victim and accused. It also involves the interest of the public at large… media report on crime-related matters involves many aspects of public interest,” the court said.

“At a basic level… fundamental right to speech and expression is directly involved in the context of both the media’s right to portray and broadcast ideas and news… but we should not allow ‘media trial’. People have the right to access information. But, if important evidence, is revealed during the investigation, the investigation can also be affected,” the court argued.

The top court was hearing a petition relating to a 2017 instruction on the same subject; the court then had asked the government to frame rules for police briefings keeping in mind the rights of the accused and the victim, and to ensure those of both sides are not prejudiced or violated in any way. The court had then given six weeks to produce a draft report.

“The accused, whose conduct is under investigation, is entitled to a fair and unbiased investigation…. at every stage, every accused is entitled to presumption of innocence. Media reportage that implicates an accused is unfair,” the court said.

In March, 2017, the Supreme Court bench headed by the then CJI J.S. Khehar had directed the Centre to prepare fresh guidelines for the police to brief the media, keeping in mind the protection of rights of both the accused and the victims of crime. It had given the government six weeks’ time to prepare the memorandum of the guidelines by examining the various suggestions submitted in the court.

“We, thereby, direct the Centre to prepare a fresh memorandum of police guidelines on media by taking into consideration the rights of the accused so that their rights are not prejudiced during trial and also the sensitive rights of victims,” the Bench had ordered then.

Similarly, in August 2014, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice (retired) R.M. Lodha had said the security agencies should stop parading accused before the media as it was an affront to their person and dignity. The Court had at the time said the agencies should also stop giving media briefings immediately after the arrest of a suspect, as what was said by investigating officers in press conferences prejudiced the person even before he was charged with the crime.

“Media briefings by police officers during on-going investigations should not happen. It is a very serious matter. This issue touches upon Article 21 [right to life and liberty including fair trial],” the Court had noted. The Court had highlighted how even statements made under Section 161 [before the police] and 164 [before a judicial magistrate] of the Criminal Procedure Code were released to the media. “Even when the trial is on, a parallel trial is run in the media,” the Supreme Court had observed.

The series of hearings in the Supreme Court stems from a clutch of writ petitions dating back to 1999. The petitions led by the NGO People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) had sought the framing of guidelines for reporting of criminal cases and encounter killings. PUCL had at the time alleged that 99 encounters took place in Mumbai resulting in the death of about 135 persons between 1995 and 1997.

The last such office memorandum by the Centre was issued on April 1, 2010 and since then much deliberation had taken place. The subject had been examined from various angles, particularly keeping in mind the protection of rights of the accused as well as the protection of the rights of the sufferer.

In March, the Chief Justice had urged journalists to “maintain standards of accuracy, impartiality and responsibility in reporting” and said, “… selective quoting of speeches and judgments has become a matter of concern. This practice has a tendency to distort public’s understanding of important legal issues. Judges’ decisions are often complex and nuanced, and selective quoting can give the impression a judgment means something different from what the judge intended.”

On behalf of the government, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati on Wednesday assured the court the government would frame and release guidelines regarding media briefings by the police. “The government will inform the court about it…” she said.