Live
- Jana Sena MLA Pulaparthi Ramanjaneyulu Elected as PAC chairman
- Stage set for counting of votes for Jharkhand Assembly elections
- MLA Sri Ganesh Engages ASHA Workers and Resource Persons in Caste Census Meeting
- Supreme Court verdict on validity of Preamble modification in 1976 likely on November 25
- ‘Zebra’ movie review: A gripping tale of banking fraud and redemption
- Saurabh Netravalkar, Unmukt Chand, Dwayne Smith and Rahkeem Cornwall headline USPL
- NPP asks members not to attend meeting called by Biren govt
- Bulls roar on Dalal Street, Sensex and Nifty up over 2 pc
- Over 880,000 people displaced in Lebanon, food security deteriorates: UN
- BGT 2024-25: Bumrah picks 4-17 as Australia trail India by 83 runs in 17-wicket day
TV debate on court matters amounts to interference: Supreme Court
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has observed that all matters connected with a crime and whether something is a “conclusive piece of evidence” must be dealt with by a court of law, and not through a TV channel.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has observed that all matters connected with a crime and whether something is a "conclusive piece of evidence" must be dealt with by a court of law, and not through a TV channel.
A bench of Justices UU Lalit and PS Narasimha said: "All matters relating to the crime and whether a particular thing happens to be a conclusive piece of evidence must be dealt with by a court of law and not through a TV channel. If at all, there was a voluntary statement, the matter would be dealt with by the court of law."
"In the process, a confession of an accused which is otherwise hit by the principles of Evidence Act finds its place on record. Such kind of statements may have a direct tendency to influence and prejudice the mind of the court. This practice must immediately be stopped. In the present case, the trial court not only extracted the entire statements but also relied upon them," it held. The bench said if at all the accused were desirous of making confessions, the investigating machinery could have facilitated recording of confession by producing them before a magistrate for appropriate action in terms of Section 164 of the Code.
