Trial by media

In this article I will show how media affects trial system in India. The leading case which shows such trial by media is jessica lal murder case.

Lets have a brief overview of raw facts:

30.4.1999: Jessica was shot in a night club called kutub kolloned.

6.5.1999: Her alleged killer Manu Sharma surrendered in a court in Chandigarh. He and Vikash Yadav were arrested. Delhi high court gave bail to manu. court extends the bail period lated.

3.8.1999: Police frame the charge sheet.

31.1.2000: The case was sent to sub divisional court.

23.11.2001: Trial started at sub divisional court.

3.5.2001: The accuser and eye witness sayan munsi changed his testimony he cannot recognize Manu in court.

5.5.2001: The electrician Shiv Das, another eye witness changes his testimony  too.

16.5.2001: The third eye witness Karan Rajput also changed his testimony.

6.7.2001: Malini Ramani identified Manu

12.10.2001: Veena ramani identified Manu

17.10.2001: Veena's husband george milehot identified manu.

2002: Manu got interim bail.

12.4.2005: Delhi high court grant bail to Manu.

In the meantime forensic report arrived. One from central forensic sciences lab and another from Rajasthan forensic sciences lab. The former says that 2 shots were fired from 2 different .22 cal. gun. The later says that it is difficult to give opinion unless the gun is available for examination.

21.2. 2006: Sub divisional court acquits all accused for lack of evidence.

After the lawful acquittal, media started its trial. It demonize Manu over and over, throughout 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The result is a huge public opinion created against manu sharma who was lawfully acquitted by lower court for lack of evidence. As a consequence of media pressure:

13.3.2006: Police filed an appeal to the high court.

3.10.2006: High court started the trial.

18.12.2006: High court found all of the accused (9) guilty.

2.2.2007: Manu filed an appeal to supreme court.

11.4.2008: Supreme Court started trial.

19.4.2010: SC upheld the decision of high court.

Now lets analyze the facts and see what conclusion follows. In lower court 2 type of evidences are used: forensic report and eye witness. These 2 evidences must support each other to arrive at a conclusion. But here these 2 evidence contradicts each other. Forensic report said that 2 shots were fired from 2 different fire arms while eye witness said manu did it. Now if 2 shots were fired from 2 different fire arms, then question arises that who is the real killer? who actually killed jessica? On the other hand if testimonies of eye witnesses are trusted, then manu is the killer. Hence which evidences to believe and why?  Police also failed to provide the fire arm. Hence a doubt arises. so lower court rightfully acquit Manu on benefit of doubt.

But then media started creating public opinion. Why? Obviously not for jessica lal but for TRP of the channel. Since media campaign against manu started, public opinion go against manu. This move pressurizes the police and judiciary. as a result police is compelled to file appeal to high court and latter is compelled to punish Manu Sharma. But on what ground? The conflict between eye witness and forensic report is still there and fire arms is still unavailable. So, why high court found manu guilty? Obviously because of media pressure.

Now the question is is it the rule of law or rule of media that prevails in india? When someone is not guilty in the eye of law for benefit of doubt and lack of evidence, he is guilty in eye of TRP hungry media. And court is not listening to law but the same TRP hungry media. is this why people don't trust law and court?

Another point is very contemporary. In this case manu sharma,son of the CM, being a murder suspect got bail 3 times. Why then in a simple 498A case or theft case, a common man cannot get bail at least one time? Is it so because Manu Sharma is the son of the CM? Do common people has same power to do harm as manu sharma has as a son of the CM? I put these questions to the reader.