The Bombay High Court today ordered the implementation of the three central agencies – the CBI, the ED and the NCB – that hear the PILs against the media judgment in the Sushant-Rhea case. The petitioners alleged a trial by the media in the case.
Hearing from a group of PILs, the Bombay High Court made the CBI, DE and NCP more responsive on the matter of the alleged media trial of actor Rhea Chakraborty in the death case of Sushant Singh Rajput.
HIGHLIGHT
- Mumbai High Court hears PILs against media trial in Sushant-Rhea case
- The superior court orders to make CBI, ED and NCB matches
- Aggrieved parties can approach NBA, Center tells high court
Hearing a lot of public interest litigation (PIL) against the alleged media judgment in the case of the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput while keeping his girlfriend Rhea Chakraborty in focus, the Bombay High Court today ordered the implementation of central agencies in the case.
The higher court ordered that the Central Investigation Office (CBI), the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Narcotics Control Office (NCB) Additional respondents will be made in the case.
The three agencies are investigating different angles arising from the investigation into the death of Sushant Singh Rajput. The actor was found dead on June 14 in his Mumbai apartment. Rhea Chakraborty has been in the spotlight since his death. Later, his family accused Sushant Singh Rajput’s girlfriend, Rhea Chakraborty, of being an accessory to the suicide and diverting 15 million rupees from the actor’s bank accounts.
Rhea Chakraborty was later arrested by the NCB for allegedly acquire prohibited drugs for Sushant Singh Rajput. His brother Showik Chakraborty had previously been arrested on similar charges.
Retired civil servant Subhash Chander Chaba, journalist Mahibub Shaikh and filmmaker Nilesh Navlakha have filed petitions seeking guidance against the media trial in the case during the central agencies investigation.
However, the bank of the Supreme Court Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice GS Kulkarni refused to implement Rhea Chakraborty in the case. The petitioners argued that their statements would reveal the true impact of the alleged media trial in the case.
During the previous hearing, the high court had sought responses from all respondents, including the central government and three private news channels. The Center in its affidavit said aggrieved persons should approach the Press Council of India (PCI) or the Association of News Broadcasters (NBA).
“Some complaints, including those of the petitioners on 06-20-2020, have been received in the [Information and Broadcasting] Ministry against television broadcast of news reports related to the unfortunate disappearance of actor Sushant Singh Rajput on various television news channels. Some of these television channels are members of the self-regulatory body, namely the News Broadcasters Association. These complaints were forwarded to the NBA for action on 10/8/2020. The NBA has reported that the matter is being investigated, “the Center told the Bombay High Court.
The PCI is a statutory body created under the India Press Council Act 1978, while the NBA is a self-regulatory body for television news and current affairs channels, the government told the court.
The higher court was surprised that there was no legal body to regulate electronic media. “Why is electronic media unregulated?” The high court asked, noting that the NBA is a toothless body.
At its hearing on September 3, the high court had ordered the news channels to report responsibly on the death case of Sushant Singh Rajput and the ensuing investigation against Rhea Chakraborty by central agencies. The superior court published the matter for the next hearing on October 8.
