Media debates on legal issues held without understanding legal provisions, principles; leave judiciary alone: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court on Thursday observed that media debates on legal proceedings are held without properly understanding the circumstances under which the courts take decisions and ignorance of legal provisions and principles applied by the courts [xxxxx v State of Kerala & Ors.]..Justice Ziyad Rahman AA lamented the fact that such debates convey not news but views and media trials of actual trials often prejudge and pass verdicts and expect courts to follow the same."It is unfortunate that, in the debates in media (‘trials’), causes and issues are prejudged, and the verdicts are passed, expecting the courts to pass orders, sentencing the accused to the maximum, by following their declarations. These so called debates, claimed to be carried out to enlighten the public at large, convey their views(instead of news), without even fully knowing the nature of materials placed before the court, without properly understanding the circumstances under which the courts take decisions and unaware of the legal provisions and principles relied on/applied by the courts," the Court said. .The Court made the observation while dismissing the transfer plea moved by the survivor in the 2017 actress assault case, as it noted that the media debates of the case had created wrong perceptions of the trial which is currently underway. It also noted that the Court had previously made adverse observations against the media's approach to the same case while considering the anticipatory bail plea moved by one of the accused in the case, Malayalam cine actor Dileep.In said order, single-judge Justice Gopinath P had observed that the discussions on mainstream and social media have dissected the process of the court and even though free speech must be protected zealously, the same cannot be a license for persons with little knowledge of legal principles to abuse the justice delivery system..Justice Rahman said that he concurs with Justice Gopinath and that the judiciary needs to be left alone by the media which has acted irresponsibly, especially while covering the actress assault case. "I endorse the said observations wholeheartedly. Now, it's time for introspection, it's time to take the stock and it's time to leave the justice delivery system alone, to do its job. Although criticism is the backbone of democracy and the media is expected to do that, in this case, it is seen transgressed the limits of fairness, reasonableness and rationality," the order stated..[Dileep Bail] Press Freedom not a license to abuse judiciary: Kerala High Court .While considering the survivor actress's transfer petition, the Court observed that it is evident that she was skeptical about the whole proceedings right from the inception. Instances for the same are plenty, Court said, pointing out that she as well as the prosecution had previously approached the Court seeking transfer of the case, raising allegations of bias against the Sessions Judge currently trying the case. The Court had dismissed the same.However, even before filing the instant transfer plea, the survivor had moved the Court raising allegations against the investigation team and had sought further investigation under the supervision of the court. .After going through the allegations raised in the present transfer plea, the Court deemed it fit to dismiss the same as it found that the evidence submitted was not sufficient to justify the apprehensions drawn by the survivor against the Session Court Judge..While doing so, the Court opined that even though the survivor seemed to have approached it without any malafide intentions, she too seemed to have been a victim of the media debates on the trial.."Possibly, the frequent discussions and debates conducted and being conducted by various News Channels in connection with this case for several days and months created some wrong perceptions about the trial of the case, and it apparently influenced the general public at large, including the petitioner. Though I do find that this petition is submitted by the petitioner with all bonafides, I have all the reasons to assume that she is a victim of such wrong perceptions and aspersions created by the media," the Court said in its order..[Read Order]