The Mumbai High Court on Thursday urged the media to exercise “restraint” in reporting on the Sushant Singh Rajput case, and not to report in a way that could hamper investigations.
“We urge and hope that the media exercise restraint in reporting the investigation regarding (Sushant’s) death, which should not impede the investigation in any way,” ordered a divisional court consisting of Judge AA Sayed. and judge SP Tavade.
Upon hearing two public interest litigation (PIL), one brought by eight retired Maharashtra IPS officers and one by three activists, the court also issued notices to the defendants and said it would consider the requested reparations in the matter after obtaining the version. of the Central Bureau of Investigation, which is handling the investigation.
In defending the PIL by former IPS officers, lead attorney Milind Sathe called the media reporting, especially by electronic media, as a “parallel media trial” in which there was defamation of the Mumbai police.
“The media has practically taken over the investigation, conducting a parallel investigation and a parallel trial … Mumbai police are being called ‘complicit’, there is a malicious smear campaign,” Sathe said.
He argued that the petitioners are not concerned with who is investigating the case, the accused or the victim, but rather that the information in the case violates journalistic ethics.
Sathe referred to the ruling of the Supreme Court of August 19, which found no flaws in the procedures adopted by the Mumbai Police in the investigation, but despite this, the media were dedicated to falsely tarnish the image of the city police.
He also noted how some outlets were calling witnesses and asking them questions, which was like a ‘parallel investigation’, an attempt to influence the investigation and prejudge the case.
In the second PIL presented by filmmaker Nilesh Navlakha, journalist MD Shaikh, and retired bureaucrat SC Chaba, presented by attorneys Rajesh Inamdar and Shashwat Anand, lead defender Devadatt Kamat said that the media has flouted the rules of the Council of India Press and Program Code under the Cable TV Act.
“While one TV channel said Sushant’s suicide was a mistake, another showed the dead actor’s body, one channel circulated fake tweets like Sushant’s last message and then when it was found to be false, deleted them, and Channels discuss the private chats between the deceased actor and Rhea Chakraborty, argued a Kamat.
Claiming that the media is not looking for the truth, but for PRTs and more business profits, Kamat pointed out how, when a witness came out of the CBI investigation, he was harassed by the media about the questions they asked.
In an unprecedented move, eight retired IPS officers came together on behalf of the embattled Mumbai Police to prevent their reputation from being defamed in the ongoing high-profile investigation into Sushant’s death case and the subsequent mid-trial. ‘
The eight former officers, who held senior positions in the Maharashtra police, have filed a public interest litigation in the Bombay High Court seeking instructions to stop the “unfair, malicious and false media campaign” against the Mumbai police in the case.
The petitioners are: MN Singh, PS Pasricha, DN Jadhav, D. Shivanandan, Sanjeev Dayal, K. Subramaniam, SC Mathur and KP Raghuvanshi, all at the CEO level at the time of their retirement and enjoying an envious reputation.
Interior Minister Anil Deshmukh praised the move by retired IPS officials on Thursday.
“The Maharashtra and Mumbai police have reputations. They are compared to the Scottish Yard. The way the Mumbai police were attacked in the (Sushant) case, I welcome the PIL,” Deshmukh told the media.
Filed through a prominent law firm, Crawford, Bayley & Company’s senior counsel Milind Sathe, the PIL appointed the Union and State governments, the Press Council of India and the Broadcasters Association of news as respondents.
The PIL sought guidelines for the media, whether print, electronic, radio, Internet or television or in any other way, to refrain from publishing and circulating any false, disparaging and scandalous comments, social media posts, news, etc. ., which could jeopardize the reputation of the police and can cause people to lose faith in the police system and administration, or hinder the cause of the administration of justice.
.
