TRIAL BY MEDIA: JUSTICE OR PREJUDICE

The media is often referred to as the fourth pillar of democracy because it plays a very important role in a democratic country. The media provide important information to the general public. It informs about important events and provides a voice for the people who are ignored. The media questions power and exposes corrupt practices in the system. The media plays a significant role in spreading awareness about issues among the people of the country. The reach of media has significantly increased with the growth of television channels and social media platforms, and people receive information within a few seconds. Along with these plus points of the media, there are some downsides of the media, particularly in the criminal justice system of India. Over the past few years, the media trial has become common. Before the actual trial or before the judge's decision, the media already decides who is guilty and who is innocent. This practice is called trial by media because the media decides the case before the court pronounces its judgment. This gives rise to a serious question: Does the media help in justice or destroy it? Media trials influence the opinion of people and can have a negative impact on the reputation of the accused, victim, and even on the judicial process itself. Before the final decision of the court, when the media influences or shapes the opinion of the public in relation to the guilt or innocence of the accused, it is called trial by media. This is done by continuous or repeated coverage on television channels. General people read or watch the same thing multiple times and form a perspective without actually knowing the reality. The image of the person gets damaged for life even if he is found innocent at the end of the trial. The media is under a duty to provide information to the public, but at the same time, it should respect the boundaries which are essential for the administration of justice. It should not do excessive reporting which interferes with the investigation and hampers witnesses, and damages their dignity. The question is not whether the media should report or not, but what the way of reporting should be, which does not affect the rights of the parties involved and does not prejudice the judicial process