22 August 2024 - Legal Updates

1. Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Bail Granted to Accused in Gauri Lankesh Murder Case

The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition seeking cancellation of bail of Mohan Nayak N, an accused in the murder case of journalist and activist Gauri Lankesh.

On September 5, 2017, Gauri Lankesh was shot dead in front of her residence in south Bengaluru. The police have arrested 18 persons in the case. Nayak was arrested on July 18, 2018.

The present SLP was filed by Gauri Lankesh's sister Kavitha Lankesh challenging the bail order of the Karnataka High Court dated December 7, 2023, against accused no. 11 (Nayak). The High Court while granting the bail had taken into consideration that Nayak has been in jail for the last five years and out of 527 chargesheeted witnesses, out 90 were examined so far.

Before a bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra (appearing for respondent State of Karnataka) apprised that so far 137 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. Whereas, 137 witnesses has been dropped and the prosecution is also likely to drop 150 more witnesses.

Luthra added that only 100 witnesses are therefore left to be examined.

The Court noted the undisputed factual position that Nayak has cooperated with the trial and has not sought any adjournment so far.

On these considerations, the court declined to interfere with the bail order of the High Court. However, it noted: "It goes without saying that if the respondent – accused does not cooperate or asks for unnecessary adjournment(s) or commits breach of any condition, the State of Karnataka or the complainant shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail, and if any such application is filed, the same shall be decided on its own merits and in accordance with law".

It has directed that the "trial court shall expeditiously conduct the trial and all the parties shall cooperate with the trial court in concluding the trial".

Case- Kavitha Lankesh vs. The State of Karnataka & Ors.

2. Calcutta High Court Declines to issue Gag Order in former RG Kar Principal Dr. Sandip Ghosh’s Plea Alleging Media Trial

The Calcutta High Court has refused to issue an order restraining media outlets from broadcasting news about former RG Kar principal Dr. Sandip Ghosh, in a plea by the ex-principal alleging media trial.

A single bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar declined Ghosh’s plea while cautioning the media to avoid animated dramatization and publish objective news instead of subjective opinion. The court said-

“The media ensures that the individuals (members of civil society) participate in a matter of national importance. In this case, the incident has attained a status of global importance. Thus, right to information would be fundamental in this case, as each and every member of civil society is severely affected by the incident either directly or indirectly.”

"At this stage, any restriction either on the media or the intermediaries, apart from an expectation and trust that they will discharge their function with responsibility, is not necessary. The news with regard to the interrogation process shall be broadcast without prejudging or commenting on the role of the petitioner no.1. The news should be objective and not the subjective opinion of the media. The media must not take up the role of the investigating agency. The media houses and intermediaries should refrain from publishing animated dramatization of the interrogation," it added.

Ghosh approached the court alleging that the media houses had been publishing untrue, unreal and malicious stories with regard to his involvement in the unfortunate incident of rape and murder of a student which took place on August 9, 2024 in R.G. Kar Hospital.

According to the petitioners, the news publications and the social media posts resulted in public anger, prejudice to the ongoing investigation, denial of their right to privacy and negative impact on their reputation and social standing.

Deputy Solicitor General submitted that the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 provide an adequate remedy and the petitioners can approach the concerned authority by praying for the removal of any alleged offensive content on social media platforms and for further steps against such intermediaries.

Advocate appearing for Twitter, which is renamed as 'X' corporation submitted that the said respondent is an intermediary and the Code referred to earlier, provides adequate remedy to the petitioners. The petitioners can proceed under the said Code of 2021 by praying for the removal of any prejudicial content and the provisions may be applied by the authority on the basis of the facts and nature of the complaint.

While equating the right of privacy of the petitioners with the freedom of speech and right to trade of the media houses, the court held that no outright order, gagging the media from reporting on news about Ghosh could be issued.

It was held that in case Ghosh is aggrieved by any reporting, he would be at liberty to approach the relevant authorities. 

With these observations, the court disposed of the plea while reminding the media houses to be factual and fair in their reporting.

Background-

RG Kar hospital has been the scene of a gruesome rape and murder of a 2nd Year PG medical student, last week, leading to mammoth protests across the country. The High Court had transferred the probe into the doctor's rape and murder to the CBI, which had just begun its investigation a day before the vandalism occurred.

The High Court transferred the investigation into the gruesome incident to the CBI, upon noting that the state police had not been proactive in the investigation of the incident and the state administration was not "with the victim or her parents."

A division bench of Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharya were hearing multiple pleas, including one by the parents of the victim seeking transfer of investigation to an independent agency. In expressing concerns over the progress of the investigation under the state police.

After a preliminary investigation, the Kolkata Police had arrested a 'civic volunteer' who worked with the local police force. This arrest has been termed as a cover-up, with the counsel claiming that the state police's investigation had been faulty and they were trying to make a scapegoat out of the accused in an attempt to cover up the real facts.

In noting that a report could be called for by the state police under normal circumstances, the court noted the peculiar nature of the facts in this case and acceded to the parents' prayer that any further delay would lead to the destruction of evidence.

The matter was also taken up suo moto by the Supreme Court which passed directions to ensure that the identity and photos of the victim were not circulated on social media, as well as for security at RG Kar hospital, and to form a task force to look into instances of sexual violence against medical professionals.

Case- Dr. Sandip Ghosh & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.