The Kerala High Court emphasized that while the media has the right to freedom of speech and expression, it must exercise this responsibly and avoid overstepping its boundaries. The court cautioned against the media conducting “media trials” or assuming judicial roles under the pretense of press freedom. It highlighted the need for the press to self-regulate, drawing a “Lakshman Rekha” to respect the judiciary’s role.
The Kerala High Court ruled that media should not assume the roles of investigative or judicial authorities when covering ongoing investigations or criminal cases.
The five-judge bench, including Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar, Kauser Edappagath, Mohammed Nias CP, CS Sudha, and Syam Kumar VK, stated,
“While freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) is 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.”
The Kerala High Court highlighted that unrestricted media reporting could prejudice public opinion and erode trust in judicial outcomes.
The bench noted that,
“Trial by media can unfairly influence public perception, effectively creating a kangaroo court.”
While the media has the right to report facts, the court stressed that it must avoid expressing definitive opinions on cases still under investigation, as doing so could violate the rights of the accused and risk public mistrust if judicial outcomes differ from media portrayals.
The bench stated,
“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,”
Adding that such trials “exceed the limits of ethical caution and fair comment” by portraying suspects as guilty or innocent before any court verdict.
This, the court said, represents
“A gross violation of the right of the accused, victim, and witnesses to a fair trial under the Constitution.”
Read Also: Supreme Court Addresses Media Trials, Calls for New Police Briefing Manual
The ruling responded to three writ petitions, initially referred to a larger bench in 2018 due to concerns over media trials, which sought limits on media powers when covering active investigations and ongoing trials.
The court emphasized that freedom of expression, though guaranteed, is subject to reasonable restrictions when conflicting with individuals’ rights to privacy and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
