Thread 1/4
A Delhi court took objection to an OpIndia report that started with “Radical Islamist and Anti Hindu Delhi Riots accused Umar Khalid..”
The order said this portrayed Delhi riots as anti-Hindu, when that is not the case.

Read @TheQuint https://www.thequint.com/news/india/delhi-riots-2020-court-order-on-umar-khalid-media-trial-plea#read-more

2/4
About the specific report, the order also said:
"Such news item might show to the public at large that accused Umar Khalid had in fact confessed/admitted his role in Delhi riots. However, it is the duty of the judicial system to decide a case on merits after trial’.

3/4
The order states that news reports only highlighted that Khalid had confessed to his involvement, however none of them clarified to its readers that such a statement could not be used by the prosecution as evidence.

4/4
“A reporter should have such a basic knowledge of law as readers/viewers consider news item as true without verifying the facts. Further, general public might not be aware of the law as above mentioned.”

Fin.