Dileep moves Kerala High Court to gag media in actress assault trial

Malayalam cine actor Dileep, who is one of the accused in the 2017 case involving the abduction and assault of an actress, has approached the Kerala High Court seeking orders to restrain media from reporting on the trial of the case till the final verdict is pronounced. .When the trial before the sessions court began, there was a huge media furore and Dileep, the eighth accused in the case, had moved the Additional Special Sessions Judge (SPE/CBI )-III, Ernakulam for issuing a direction to prohibit media publication of court proceedings. The trial judge had allowed Dileep's plea and directed that nobody should print or publish the proceedings in connection with the case except the matters permitted as per the directions of the Supreme Court in Nipun Saxena & Anr. v Union of India & Ors.However, according to Dileep, even after the trial judge's gag order, the media resorted to publication of matters in violation of Section 327(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This prompted him to approach the High Court through advocates Philip T Varghese, Thomas T Varghese, Achu Shubha Abraham, Litha VT, Monisha KR and Nitya R..The petition particularly mentioned Reporter TV, the promoter of which has been arrayed as the third respondent. The CEO of the company, Nikesh Kumar, is a journalist nurturing political aspirations who had contested and lost in the 2016 Kerala Legislative Assembly elections, the plea pointed out.Kumar was cited as a prosecution witness and had deposed before the trial court which scheduled his re-examination on December 29, 2021. "While so, the 3rd respondent telecast through their ‘Reporter TV’ as ‘Breaking News’ and ‘Exclusive’, interview with a person named Mr. P Balachandra Kumar on 25.12.2021," the plea claimed..Kumar also appeared along with Balachandra Kumar and both of them made statements alleging that Dileep was a close acquaintance of the first accused, Pulsar Suni. Pertinently, the plea also alleged that the statements made by Balachandra Kumar were tutored by the investigating officer in the case "with the deliberate intention to prejudice the mind of the public against the petitioner and influence the outcome of the trial which is pending before the Sessions Court." .While the main grievance raised in the petition was regarding Reporter TV, Dileep also contended that several other print, digital and social media platforms are now printing and publishing matters in a bid to compete with Reporter TV, encouraged by the fact that no action has been taken by the State Police or the Investigating Officer against such publication. This amounts to criminal contempt and which is in violation of the mandate of Section 327(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is an offence chargeable and punishable under Section 228 A (3) of the Indian Penal Code, it is submitted..These actions by media amount to trial by media which impedes the right to a fair trial guaranteed to the accused.The same is an affront to two foundational principles of law, namely the rule of law and the administration of justice by courts, the plea said. .According to Dileep, there is real and substantial risk of prejudice to the proper administration of justice and to the fairness of trial by such publication.In such circumstances, he argued that the Court is bound to pass an order postponing the reporting of all matters concerning the trial till the conclusion of the trial laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Sahara Real Estate Corporation Limited & Ors. v Securities and Exchange Board of India & Anr.