The Bombay high court on Friday finally accepted the circular issued by the state government imposing a gag order on police officers, public prosecutors (PP) and special public prosecutors (SPP) to keep them from disclosing information regarding ongoing investigations and trials to the media.
A division bench of Justices Abhay Oka and Ajey Gadkari accepted the circular after rejecting at least three earlier drafts. The government has been asked to frame a policy in this regard within six months.
Till the policy is in place, the HC has asked the government to provide a copy of the circular to all police officers and prosecutors. Moreover, while appointing new prosecutors, the government should attach a copy of the circular along with the appointment letter, the HC said.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation filed by advocate Rahul Thakur seeking restraint on trial by media, saying it infringed on the accused's right to a fair trial.
The circular says: Investigating officers, senior police officers, PPs and SPP often reveal aspects of investigation and trial to the media. This violates the rights of accused, victims and their family members. Hence, the above persons should take care not to reveal identity and information to media that would violate their rights, or hamper investigation or trial.
Police officers have also been restrained from providing either photos or videos of the accused or confessional statements given by accused. Even the modus operandi adopted by the accused shall not be revealed.
The police have been restrained from parading the accused, even though hiding their faces behind a mask, before media while holding press conferences.
As far as cases concerning national security are concerned, the police should not reveal any information to the media till the probe is over and all accused are arrested and a charge sheet is filed, adds the circular. The police shall also not reveal efforts taken to trace absconding accused, it says.
The judges even asked the central government to consider issuing a similar circular imposing a gag order on police and prosecutors. The Centre has been asked to clarify its stand in the issue by December 23.
What the PIL contends
The PIL has contended that 'overzealous sections of the media' had a tendency to infringe upon fundamental rights like privacy, fair trial and dignity of the citizens. It mainly objects to the police parading an accused before the press, using gory pictures and revealing names of accused and their relatives. The petitioner said this estranged an accused from the society and attached stigma to him/her. The PIL also opposes the media portraying an accused as a convict even before the trial. Citing Supreme Court judgments, the petitioner said the right to freedom of speech was not an absolute right and was subject to certain restrictions, and that the state could impose certain liberties granted to the media.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}