The Kerala High Court ruled that media outlets must refrain from taking on the role of investigative or judicial authorities when reporting on ongoing investigations or criminal cases.

“While freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) was fundamental, it does not grant the media a ‘licence’ to pronounce on an accused's guilt or innocence before legal authorities have reached a verdict," a five-judge bench comprising Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar, Kauser Edappagath, Mohammed Nias CP, CS Sudha, and Syam Kumar VK said.

The bench also observed in the ruling that unrestricted reporting could lead to prejudice in opinions and public mistrust in judicial outcomes.

The High Court pointed out that trial by media can unfairly influence public opinion and lead to "pre-judgment" of suspects, effectively operating as a "kangaroo court."

The court emphasised that while the media has the right to report facts, it should exercise caution and avoid expressing definitive opinions on cases still under investigation. Doing so, the judges warned, not only infringes on the accused’s rights but also risks eroding public trust if the judicial outcome later differs from media portrayals.

"It is desirable that the media realise its responsibility to society and draw the 'Lakshman Rekha' themselves without overstepping into the domain of the judiciary and the investigating agency and ensure that no media trial is undertaken, which causes prejudice to the fair trial and has an adverse impact on the privacy and dignity of the accused and the victim," the bench said.

Media trials "exceed the limits of ethical caution and fair comment" and project the suspect or accused as guilty or innocent even before the court delivers a verdict, it further said.

This, it said, amounted to "a gross violation of the right of the accused, victim, and witnesses to a fair trial" guaranteed under the Constitution.

This ruling was issued in response to three writ petitions seeking to restrict media powers in covering active investigations and ongoing trials. These petitions had been referred to a larger bench in 2018, following an earlier decision of the High Court, due to concerns over “media trials.”

In its detailed order, the court underscored that the freedom of expression guaranteed to the media is subject to reasonable restrictions, especially when it conflicts with an individual's right to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Source: India Today