Presumption of Innocence and Dilution of Facts by Media Trials

  • Tanya Mayal
  • Show Author Details
  • Tanya Mayal

    Student at Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab, India

  • img Save PDF


We have all heard about the principle of presumption of innocence or “innocent until proven guilty”, a standard doctrine abided by the courts and all investigative and judicial authorities of the country. Back in the good old days, we had no option but to sit back and watch as a trial lived its due course of time, facts unfolded one after the other, witnesses stepped forward to testify, witnesses turned hostile, the accused almost failing to prove his innocence, and one new piece of evidence turning the whole case around. Cut to the twenty-first century, where one can only dream of a high-profile trial being kept away from opinions, criticisms and judgements of millions sitting in-front of the TV screens, a smaller screen in their hands, ready to press the “post” button, their unsolicited comment ready to be read, forwarded and absorbed forever by a phenomenal black hole called social media. Press and media, priding itself as the fourth pillar of democracy has now turned into a catalyst and instigator of public hate and open trials, breaching the sanctity of a judicial system that craves to look at the suspect before it with an impartial eye.


Research Paper


International Journal of Legal Science and Innovation, Volume 3, Issue 3, Page 475 - 482


Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution -NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (, which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.


Copyright © IJLSI 2021