This article discusses Trial by Media in India and how it affects the proceedings of a case, further if Trial by Media requires a line to be drawn inorder to stop any influence upon the court due to media reports.
Trial by media is an expression famous to portray the effect of newspapers and television coverage on a person’s reputation or on his/her life by making an across the board impression of blame or innocence previously, or after, a decision in a courtroom. Generally, the coverage in the press can be said to mirror the perspectives of the individual in the society. In any case, greater belief is given to printed media. Amid high-publicity, the media are frequently blamed for inciting a climate of open craziness similar to that of a lynch crowd which not only makes a perfect trial impossible but also harms the reputation of the accused for the lifetime. In countries like the United Kingdom, contempt of court rules control the media’s reporting of trial proceedings after the formal arrest of a person. Such regulations are made in such a way that an accused gets a fair trial in the court that has not been influenced by media reporting.
In India, Media holds a very important part in convincing and motivating the society as a whole. Let it be a Legal issue or a social issue or even a political issue. At times, it’s a real public view and at times the Media Trial is affected by the parties involved in the case. When the Media proceeds with its own Trial then the public opinion starts to get influenced and people instantly start believing on such Media Trials. Another sad truth is that in India, the judicial process is very time consuming and slow due to various reasons. Thus, people choose to trust on the media trials instead of waiting for the actual Judgment by the court of Law. In cases like the Priyadarshini Matoo case and the Jessica Lal case, electronic media, in particular, has played a very important role in ensuring that the wrongdoers did not escape by using unlawful means and by misusing their power and money to affect investigative agencies or the justice system. While there have been other happenings where the media trial was criticized, in these cases, it effectively influenced the society and brought justice for the victim. Media’s role in these cases also shows that if the media participates actively in any case then it helps the family of victim get justice.
Hence, it can be concluded that “Trial by media” has both pros as well as cons but surely, the pros outweigh the cons at several instances. Media influences the public at large and moreover, the judges also somehow get influenced because they can’t be isolated from society. So, one can say that there is a need for drawing a line for media trial as sometimes fake allegation by media can undermine a courtroom. “Trial by Media” is very important for delivering justice in high-profile cases and that’s the reason why this line should not be hard and fast.
This article is written by Rudra Shandilya of
Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University,
Visakhapatnam.
Disclaimer: This article is an original submission of the Author. Lex Insight does not hold any liability arising out of this article. Kindly refer to our Terms of use or write to us in case of any concerns.