'Media should have reported that confession inadmissible evidence'

New Delhi: A Delhi court on Friday said that news media and publications should not have reported purported "confessions" of former JNU student leader Umar Khalid in one of the north-east Delhi riots cases without noting that these would be inadmissible as evidence in a trial and practically useless for the prosecution to build their case upon. It added that reporters should at least have a basic enough knowledge of law so as to not prejudice the accused's trial.

"The news reports have only highlighted that accused Khalid had confessed his involvement in the riots but none of the news items made a clarification to its readers/viewers that such a statement, even if actually made, could not be used by the prosecution as evidence," the court said.

It further rebuked the media saying a reporter should have such basic knowledge of law because readers/ viewers consider news items as true without verifying the facts.

"The general public might not be aware of the law as above mentioned. Therefore, it is the duty of the Press and Media to inform and educate its readers and viewers about all the relevant facts and circumstances of a news item published or shown on the News channel," the court said.

The court said it hoped that the media would follow "self regulation techniques" while reporting on a case pending investigation or trail. "Self regulation is the best mode of regulation," Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Dinesh Kumar said.

The court was hearing a plea by Khalid, charged under the UAPA, noting that the media reports publishing his "confession", where he had written that he has refused to sign, were prejudicing his right to a free and fair trial.

"There exists a risk of prejudice being caused if the press and media fail to do their duty with care and caution. One of such risks is that of 'Media Trial'. One of the basic principles of criminal jurisprudence is presumption of innocence.

"This should not be destroyed at the very threshold through the process of media trial. Protection of such presumption is essential for maintenance of the dignity of the courts and is one of the cardinal principles of the rule of law in a free democratic country," the court said.

The court noted that one of the news items started with the words 'Radical Islamist and Anti Hindu Delhi Riots accused Umar Khalid' and it portrayed the entire Delhi riots as anti-Hindu riots, but all the communities felt the consequences.

However, in fact this does not appear to be the case, as all the communities have felt the consequences of those riots. Such news items might show to the public at large that accused Umar Khalid had in fact confessed/ admitted his role in Delhi riots. However, it is the duty of the judicial system to decide a case on merits after trial.

Considering the fact that the accused did not make any specific prayer in the application, I hope that the reporters would use self regulation techniques while publishing or showing a news item related to a case pending investigation or trial so that no prejudice is caused to any accused or any other party. Self regulation is the best mode of regulation, the judge noted.