
The Kerala High Court on 7 October upheld the Ernakulam District and Sessions Court's decision rejecting a plea by the accused for an in-camera trial in the 2018 Abhimanyu murder case. Justice C.S. Dias held that the circumstances did not warrant a closed-court proceeding.
However, the court directed the trial court to prohibit photography and video-recording of the accused inside the courtroom and to consider restricting public entry during the examination of eyewitnesses to preserve the fairness of the trial. The accused had argued that without a test identification parade, witnesses might identify them based on media exposure.
The state argued that open-court proceedings are the rule and that arrangements had been made for witness safety. The court relied on Section 366 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which recognises open court as the general rule but preserves judicial discretion to restrict access when necessary.
Both sources report the same outcome neutrally. The Hindu leads with the court's denial and adds the state's argument that witnesses had already identified the accused through a photo identification parade, which Livelaw omits. Livelaw includes the detail that investigation is ongoing against ten additional accused (Nos 17-26), which The Hindu leaves out. Livelaw also names the precedent cited by the petitioners, Jollyamma Joseph v. State of Kerala, while The Hindu does not. The coverage is uniform straight reporting from the court order, neither outlet frames the ruling in favour of or against the government or the accused. The next step is the continuation of the trial before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam.
Coverage: 2 sources, 2 neutral
Sources (2): thehindu.com (neutral report), livelaw.in (neutral report)
This brief was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry. Methodology and corrections.