Observing that reports telecast on television channels and published on digital platforms on the ongoing murder trial involving Kannada actor Darshan, a prime accused, ‘prima facie amount to a calculated, media-driven adjudication, contrary to norms and in violation of court injunctions’, the High Court of Karnataka has directed the Central Government to act on the complaint filed by the actor against media houses.
“The material placed on record, particularly the clippings produced, unfortunately depict a disturbing trend wherein the broadcast media has gone to the extent of recreating courtroom proceedings, with only the face of the presiding judge being masked, while the faces of the accused and counsel are openly displayed,” the court stated.
Such programmes, the court stated, are telecast on every date of hearing, thereby ‘converting pending judicial proceedings’ into a form of ‘public spectacle’.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum passed the order while partly allowing a petition filed by Darshan, who is accused number 2 in the Renukaswamy murder case of 2024.
Darshan had sought directions to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to act on his complaint, filed in January 2026, against the media houses under provisions of the Cable Television Networks Regulations (CTNR) Act 1995, CTN Rules, Information Technology (IT) Act of 2000, IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
“Freedom of speech is a cherished constitutional value. However, when it degenerates into media-driven adjudication, it ceases to be a safeguard of democracy, and becomes a threat to it. The press is a watchdog, but when it assumes the role of judge, jury and executioner, the rule of law stands imperilled. Courts cannot permit the course of justice to be overshadowed by the glare of studio lights...”Justice Sachin Shankar MagadumHigh Court of Karnataka
The actor contended, in his petition, that although the trial remained nascent, television and digital platforms conducted a media trial, spreading speculation, selective leaks and unverified claims, shaping public opinion, undermining a fair trial and violating media laws.
The petition further stated that despite interim injunctions from civil court and the High Court restraining publication of confidential charge sheet material, several television channels and digital platforms continued to telecast such content in violation of the orders.
The continued telecast of such content, in the teeth of subsisting injunction orders, reflects ‘a blatant disregard for judicial authority’ and contributes to the ‘creation of a carnival atmosphere of justice’, Justice Magadum said while observing that ‘such conduct amounts to a calculated media-driven adjudication, fostering a parallel narrative and engendering prejudicial pre-trial publicity’.
The court also said that such broadcasts, which ‘border on trial by headlines’, cannot be countenanced in a system governed by the rule of law, particularly when they are aired in wilful disobedience of binding injunctions, and in a manner that tends to interfere with the administration of justice, and prima facie contempt of court.
The material produced along with the complaint unmistakably discloses violations of television programme code, and such broadcast is per se illegal, and invites regulatory action under Section 19 and 20 of the CTNR Act, the court stated.
The court directed the ministries to examine the actor’s complaint and take immediate action within six weeks by regulating, suspending, prohibiting or directing discontinuance of such telecast, streaming, etc., pending enquiry and final consideration besides asking them to examine the necessity of prohibition of broadcast, suspension or revocation of permissions, or licences, imposition of penalties, etc., as permissible in law.