The Supreme Court on September 13 directed the government to draft a manual instructing police officers on the dos and don’ts of briefing the media, especially in sensitive cases, while protecting the sanctity of the investigation and the rights of both the accused and the victim.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud said police briefings should be tailored to the necessities and peculiarities of each individual case. Care should be taken to avoid police briefings to pave the way for media trials which pre-determine the guilt of an accused. A person is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.
Also read: Comment | The police and the journalist
Biased reportage would harm the reputations of both the accused and the victims. It may moreover derail the investigation. “The right to privacy is also a casualty,” the Court noted.
The Bench said the previous manual was over a decade old. Amicus curiae, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranaraynan said there has since been sweeping changes on the ground brought about mainly by the advent of social media. The Court agreed that it was important to balance the right to information, the rights of fair trial, competent investigation and the right to privacy and dignity of the accused and the victim involved in a case.
The Court asked the Home Ministry to prepare the manual, with inputs from the State police chiefs and the National Human Rights Commission, within three months. It scheduled the next hearing in January.
A similar order for media briefing guidelines had been passed in 2016 by a Supreme Court Bench headed by then Chief Justice J.S. Khehar. At the time, the Supreme Court had observed that the guidelines should take into consideration the “rights of the accused so that their rights are not prejudiced during trial and also the sensitive rights of victims”.
Similarly, in August 2014, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice (retired) R.M. Lodha had said that security agencies should stop parading accused before the media as it was an affront to their person and dignity.
The Court had at the time said the agencies should also stop giving media briefings immediately after the arrest of a suspect, as what was said by investigating officers in press conferences prejudiced the person even before he was charged with the crime.
“Media briefings by police officers during on-going investigations should not happen. It is a very serious matter. This issue touches upon Article 21 [right to life and liberty including fair trial],” the Court had noted.
The Court had highlighted how even statements made under Section 161 [before the police] and 164 [before a judicial magistrate] of the Criminal Procedure Code were released to the media.
“Even when the trial is on, a parallel trial is run in the media,” the Supreme Court had observed.
The series of hearings in the Supreme Court stems from a clutch of writ petitions dating back to 1999. The petitions led by the NGO People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) had sought the framing of guidelines for reporting of criminal cases and encounter killings. PUCL had at the time alleged that 99 encounters took place in Mumbai resulting in the death of about 135 persons between 1995 and 1997.
