Aryan Khan matter a classic case of civil and criminal defamation by the media

New Delhi: The treatment of Aryan Khan by the media is a classic case of the distorted state of the fourth pillar in the country. Media trial of any high-profile case is a norm across the globe but the way Indian media operates in such cases has not only brought shame to a noble profession but also spoiled innocent lives.

The media is not ready to learn lessons and it continues its hit-job against public figures. Starting from Sridevi’s death to Sushant Singh Rajput’s death to Aryan Khan’s case, the media continues its overreaching and distasteful coverage.

Call it a herd mentality or mob mentality, the entire media jumps to the mad rush for TRPs in each high-profile case without an iota of sensitivity. 

In the case of Shah Rukh Khan's son Aryan Khan too, the entire tirade against the celebrity son was based on selected leaks.

Former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, who represented Aryan Khan, lamented the media for conducting several parallel mini-trials in an interview with Karan Thapar for thewire.

“They forget what the Laxman Rekha is. They don’t have to become the judge. Unfortunately, there are so many media channels in the country and I don’t think there is enough material to feed 24 hours. They just pick up one or two things and they keep on it, till they kill it,” Rohatgi

Calling it a classic case of civil and criminal defamation by the media, Senior Supreme Court advocate Prashant Bhushan detailed the modus operandi of the media in another interview with Thapar.

“Now, the media’s defence in such cases is that even if the investigating agency is doing a dishonest job they are duty-bound to report. But that defence will not hold any ground when they do not care for official statements and press releases of the investigating agency, and they fall prey to selective leaks. Therefore, the media is also liable in this case for civil as well as criminal defamation.”

Rohatgi pointed out the prejudice the media creates and the role ideally should play.

“Media can jolly well the prejudice in the mind of a judge, though a judge is legally trained. But you know if a judge also sees TV and reads the newspaper constantly, one is branded accused, etc, it does have an impulse imperceptible effect on the mind of any individual,” he said.

“So, all media channels whether newsprint or electronic would do well to realise what their role is. Their role is to break the news and show what has happened, not determined by the virtue of these kinds of parallel discussions where people pontificate and either declare a person as acquitted or as convicted. That really impacts the trial, it impacts the life and liberty of the person concerned,” he added.