The high court said that the media should draw boundaries and refrain from trial-like reporting of ongoing criminal cases as the final and authoritative determination of guilt or innocence in a criminal case can only be made by the judiciary.
The Kerala High Court has issued strict guidelines on media coverage of ongoing criminal investigations and cases. The judges referred to the concept of a “Lakshman Rekha,” urging the media to draw clear boundaries between reporting facts and engaging in trial-like conduct.
“It is desirable that the media realize 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 harms the privacy and dignity of the accused and the victim,” the bench said.
The ruling came in response to petitions filed in 2018, calling for restrictions on media coverage of criminal trials. These petitions were referred to a larger bench due to growing concerns over “media trials” influencing public opinion and the judicial process.
A five-judge bench, led by Justices AK Jayasankaran Nambiar, Kauser Edappagath, Mohammed Nias CP, CS Sudha, and Syam Kumar VK, clarified that while media freedom is constitutionally protected, it must not infringe upon the rights of individuals or the integrity of the judicial process.
“While freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) was fundamental, it does not grant the media a ‘license’ 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 judges warned that “unrestricted reporting” could lead to “pre-judgment” and effectively turn the media into a “kangaroo court,” undermining public trust in the judicial system.
“The media’s responsibility to society must be carefully balanced with respect for individual dignity and the principle of the rule of law,” the bench said in its detailed 69-page order. It added that while the press may report facts, it should refrain from making definitive conclusions about ongoing investigations or trials. The ruling stresses that such media conduct can result in violations of the accused's rights to privacy and fair trial, as well as negatively impact the reputation of victims and witnesses.
The court further said that media trials exceed “ethical caution and fair comment,” which are vital components of responsible journalism. It condemned practices where the media projects a suspect as guilty or innocent before the legal process has run its course, which it described as a “gross violation” of the constitutional right to a fair trial.
“Any unprofessional or biased reporting that jeopardizes the fairness of the trial or tarnishes the reputation of the accused or the victim will not be protected under the freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution,” the bench said.
The court said that such reporting could be subject to legal action, stating that media outlets could be held accountable for "undue interference with the administration of justice" if they fail to adhere to these guidelines.
Concluding its order, the bench hoped the ruling would help usher in a new era of “responsible journalism.” By adhering to these principles, the media could avoid breaching fundamental rights and contribute to the integrity of the justice system.