5. IMPACT OF MEDIA TRIAL
5.1 Reach of Media over judges Another detrimental effect of media trial is the effect it has on judiciary. Judges who preside over any such matter are also human beings and are prone to various thoughts and opinions. The tone in which newspapers publish their findings are very likely to affect the mid of the judges. Judges also get influenced by the flowing air of remarks in a controversial matter. Independence of judiciary is a pre requisite to the rule of law and fundamental guarantee of fair trial. Impartiality is an outmost necessity for discharge of judicial functions. There should be reflection of impartiality not only in the decision but in the process itself. The main problem with the Press with consideration …show more content…
Several witnesses identified the person as Manu Sharma, the son of an INC politician and a relative of the former President of India Shankar Dayal Sharma. However, in spite of so many witnesses being present that night nearly all witnesses, including Jessica’s fellow bartender, retracted their initial statements made to the police which again highlights the need for witness protection in India. While the issue was gaining heights, a policeman investigating the case reported to his superiors that Sharma’s family had colluded with some police officials and destroyed evidence. This complaint was strangely ignored. The trial court had acquitted Sharma for lack of evidence . Sharma’s acquittal led to a huge public outrage and there was nationwide “Justice for Jessica” campaign. Meanwhile the Delhi High Court reversed the verdict of the trial Court and held Manu Sharma as guilty. He appealed against the verdict and the Supreme Court held that the prosecution has proved that the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt and upheld the conviction of the accused as held by the High …show more content…
During Nanda’s trial, a homeless man who had survived the accident changed his statement he had made to the police and claimed that the victims had been moved down by a truck rather than a car. This was a major drawback to the prosecution’s case. While the case was still pending in the trial court, the news channel NDTV conducted a Sting Operation using another witness in the case. The witness namely Sunil Kulkarni met Nanda’s lawyer as well as the state-appointed prosecutor. The video captured Nanda’s lawyer attempting to bribe the witness, while the state prosecutor appeared to be complicit. Soon after the exposé, Nanda was tried on a fast-track basis. A trial court convicted Nanda for culpable homicide and criminal negligence. The Delhi High Court quashed the culpable homicide conviction but upheld the conviction for criminal negligence. A typical sting operation involves numerous legal issues regarding its evidentiary validity, and the High Court observed that the Indian justice system risked becoming “a laughing stock.” The High Court debarred the two errant lawyers from appearing before it, but for a mere four months. This light punishment was opposed by some members of the Bar Council of
5.1 Reach of Media over judges Another detrimental effect of media trial is the effect it has on judiciary. Judges who preside over any such matter are also human beings and are prone to various thoughts and opinions. The tone in which newspapers publish their findings are very likely to affect the mid of the judges. Judges also get influenced by the flowing air of remarks in a controversial matter. Independence of judiciary is a pre requisite to the rule of law and fundamental guarantee of fair trial. Impartiality is an outmost necessity for discharge of judicial functions. There should be reflection of impartiality not only in the decision but in the process itself. The main problem with the Press with consideration …show more content…
Several witnesses identified the person as Manu Sharma, the son of an INC politician and a relative of the former President of India Shankar Dayal Sharma. However, in spite of so many witnesses being present that night nearly all witnesses, including Jessica’s fellow bartender, retracted their initial statements made to the police which again highlights the need for witness protection in India. While the issue was gaining heights, a policeman investigating the case reported to his superiors that Sharma’s family had colluded with some police officials and destroyed evidence. This complaint was strangely ignored. The trial court had acquitted Sharma for lack of evidence . Sharma’s acquittal led to a huge public outrage and there was nationwide “Justice for Jessica” campaign. Meanwhile the Delhi High Court reversed the verdict of the trial Court and held Manu Sharma as guilty. He appealed against the verdict and the Supreme Court held that the prosecution has proved that the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt and upheld the conviction of the accused as held by the High …show more content…
During Nanda’s trial, a homeless man who had survived the accident changed his statement he had made to the police and claimed that the victims had been moved down by a truck rather than a car. This was a major drawback to the prosecution’s case. While the case was still pending in the trial court, the news channel NDTV conducted a Sting Operation using another witness in the case. The witness namely Sunil Kulkarni met Nanda’s lawyer as well as the state-appointed prosecutor. The video captured Nanda’s lawyer attempting to bribe the witness, while the state prosecutor appeared to be complicit. Soon after the exposé, Nanda was tried on a fast-track basis. A trial court convicted Nanda for culpable homicide and criminal negligence. The Delhi High Court quashed the culpable homicide conviction but upheld the conviction for criminal negligence. A typical sting operation involves numerous legal issues regarding its evidentiary validity, and the High Court observed that the Indian justice system risked becoming “a laughing stock.” The High Court debarred the two errant lawyers from appearing before it, but for a mere four months. This light punishment was opposed by some members of the Bar Council of