Republic TV, Times Now reportage of police probe into Sushant Singh Rajput death was in brazen disregard of rule of law: Bombay High Court

The reportage by television news channels, Republic TV and Times Now on the death of Bollywood actor Sushant Singh Rajput was in brazen disregard of the rule of law which is the edifice on which the country’s Constitution rests, the Bombay High Court observed on Monday..In a scathing indictment of the manner in which the criminal investigation into the death was reported, the High Court said that the two news channels in an attempt to outsmart each other, started a vicious campaign of masquerading as crusaders of truth and justice..“Reports/ discussions/ debates/interviews on the death of the actor flowed thick and fast from these TV channels in brazen disregard of the rule of law, the edifice on which the country’s Constitution rests. These TV channels took upon themselves the role of the investigator, the prosecutor as well as the Judge and delivered the verdict as if, during the pandemic, except they all organs of the State were in slumber,” the Court said..In the process, they cared less for rights of other stakeholders, threw the commands of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and all sense of propriety to the wind, the Court added. .The observations formed part of the Court's verdict dealing with the issue of media trial during reportage of Sushant Singh Rajput investigation..Crucially, the Bench which comprised Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni also gave a clean chit to Mumbai Police stating that as per the Supreme Court's August 2020 order, the Mumbai Police cannot be accused of any wrong doing and criticism by media was unfair. ."While inquiry/investigation by Mumbai Police was strenuously asserted by these TV channels to be shoddy and questionable, the Supreme Court in its order dated August 19, 2020 recorded prima facie satisfaction of Mumbai Police not having indulged in any wrong doing," the judgment noted. .The Court observed that persistent criticism could bring down the morale of the police force, prove counter-productive and damage a good, clean image which a police officer may have built over the years..The Court also went on to urge both Republic TV and Times Now channels to resits their temptation to sensationalise while reporting news..While holding that the reporting by Republic TV and Times Now was contemptuous and interfered with the administration of justice, the Court refrained from initiating action for criminal contempt against these channels..The Court held in affirmative that these two news channels had interfered and obstructed in the administration of justice with their contemptuous reporting. However, it refrained from issuing contempt notice only because the nature of proceedings before them were to consider public interest.."Every journalist/ reporter has an overriding duty to the society of educating the masses with fair, accurate, trustworthy and responsible reports relating to reportable events and above all to the standards of his/her profession. Thus, the temptation to sensationalize should be resisted," the Court said..The Court also opined that this sort of reporting by the media was prejudicial to the interest of the accused and could dent the process of a future fair trial and derail due administration of criminal justice.."Even if the contents of the reports/discussions/debates are considered to be mere insinuations and aspersions against Mumbai Police and the actress, they lack bona fides, are aimed at interfering with and/or obstructing administration of justice and have the propensity to shake the public confidence in the capability of the police machinery and the efficacy of the judiciary," the Bench stated..The Court also took judicial notice of the hardships faced by Rhea Chakraborty because of the unfair reporting of these channels.."The actress, although entitled to her rights to life and equal protection of the laws, protected by Articles 21 and 14 of the Constitution, and the right guaranteed by Article 20(3) thereof to maintain silence, was painted as the villain of the piece, had the rug below the presumption of innocence removed, and received the media’s verdict that she is guilty of orchestrating the actor’s murder, much before filing of a police report under section 173(2), CrPC," the judgment stated..Actress (Chakraborty) was painted as villain, presumption of innocence taken away and declared guilty by media.Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni.The Court was apprised that Republic TV propagated the idea that the actor may have been “killed” and planted the doubt about whether Mumbai Police can be trusted with the investigation.The Court was not amused to note "Republic TV doffed its own hat, in appreciation of what its team had achieved, without realizing that it could be irking and invite adverse comments.".Times Now on their part, had expressed their views that the Mumbai Police had not done its job properly compelling the media to do the work of securing justice for the actor.The Court was surprised to note that the channel went to the extent of calling the PILs against media trial before Bombay High Court an attempt to stall the ongoing CBI investigation.."These TV channels took upon themselves the role of the investigator, the prosecutor as well as the Judge and delivered the verdict as if, during the pandemic, except they all organs of the State were in slumber," the High Court opined..Even though the Court refrained from issuing contempt notice against contemptuous telecast of reports/ discussions /debates/interviews by these two channels on the death of Rajput and subsequent events, the Court expressed their hope that they will act more responsibly in the future and not compel Courts to issue contempt notice in future..[Read Judgment]