Calling Media's Reporting In Sushant Singh Rajput Case 'Disturbing', PIL Before Bombay HC Seeks To Expand The Scope Of Contempt Of Courts Act, Notice Issued [Read Petition]

The petitioners alleged that reporting in the Sushant Rajput case has been disturbing and time has come to expand the scope of the act.

Division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni were hearing the said PIL filed by In Pursuit of Justice, a society registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act. Court issued notices to Union Of India, Law Commission and Press Council of India.

Petitioner society has also sought direction to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to issue appropriate orders/notification cautioning the media outlets and print media houses from publication/broadcasting of information which is likely to obstruct the administration of justice, including the process of investigation.

Referring to the coverage of Sushant Singh Rajput's case, petitioner contended that in recent times, the media has become very proactive in focusing on incidents of crime from day one by liberally commenting on the role of the police causing the investigation, the progress of the investigation, pinpointing and declaring the perpetrator of the crime, their associates, motive, etc. even before the investigation is complete and sufficient opportunity is given to the police machinery to ascertain relevant facts.

Filed on behalf of the petitioner by Dr.Neela Gokhale, Advocate Kushal Chaudhary and Advocate Shruti Dixit, the PIL states-

"The recent spate of media reporting in the case of the untimely demise of actor Sushant Singh Rajput and the extent of media frenzy concerning all issues and nonissues involving the said incident is quite disturbing. It has given rise to an urgent need of finding an acceptable constitutional balance between free press and administration of justice which in itself is a difficult task in every legal system."

Thus, the petitioners argue that there is also an urgent need to examine and interpret Section 3(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to include within its scope and ambit any publication made which obstructs or tends to obstruct the administration of justice during the pendency of proceedings, the starting point of which shall be read to be from the registration of FIR instead of filing of the final report under Section 173 of the CrPC.

Even the Law Commission in its 200th Report has also recommended that the starting point of the proceedings should be from the time a person is arrested instead of the filing of charge sheet, as the provision presently postulates, it was argued on behalf of the petitioners.

Moreover, the PIL contends-

"The filing of the present petition has been triggered by the disturbing and continuous reporting of the SSR case whereby the sanctity of the state police machinery has been demolished and the public opinion has been sought to be manipulated against the state law and order machinery, leading to an inevitable ramification that the faith and confidence of the citizens of in the police machinery of the state has been seriously impaired. This has led to a general belief that the state machinery cannot be trusted and has completely shattered the credence and reliability which the citizens are entitled to have in the local police machinery. Thus, this is nothing but an obstruction in the administration of justice and a general distrust in public institutions which is an extremely dangerous state of affairs to suffer in a democratic state."

Petitioners have also argued that it's not just the police that bears the brunt of such 'irresponsible reporting', even accused, victims and witnesses have not remained unscathed by the relentless intrusion in their private lives.

"In addition to the police being tarnished as incompetent and complacent in screening the concerned accused, the potential witnesses have been exposed by identifying them, interviewing them, bringing them in the public eye, deposing them on TV channels, terming their statements as confessions to such an extent that the potential witness, eventually when is required by law to depose on oath before a court of competent jurisdiction, is faced with the dilemma of sticking to his unverified public statement given to a reporter & stating the truth, when confronted on the witness stand.

The witness is torn between telling the undistorted truth on the witness stand and retaining his public image by sticking to the statements to a journalist which may have been informally given, but have been heard and registered by the public."

It has thus, become necessary in the interest of justice that the said provision in the Contempt of Courts Act be read down to deem that such publication may also be contemptuous as soon as an FIR is registered against a person since, the persistent salacious publication may be prejudicial to the procedure and proceedings contemplated under the 'due process of law' which shall eventually culminate in a fair trial. It is evident that such to affect the publication is seriously likely an investigation in progress and the final report to be submitted by the Agency may be affected by perceptions and prejudices created amongst the public by media pressure, the petitioner society has urged.

Recently, while hearing similar PILs seeking directions for fair reporting in the Sushant Singh Rajput death case, Bombay High Court had urged the media to show restraint in reporting and not to hamper investigation of the case.

Click Here To Download Petition

[Read Petition]