Cases of abusing the judiciary, including Supreme Court judges and even the Chief Justice of India, are increasing day by day. This is a highly perilous trend which should be stopped by law enforcement agencies. The people — or trolls — indulging in such vilification of judges and judiciary, and even lawyers who contest cases, should be held accountable and be punished in accordance with law as well as hauled up for contempt of court. In our democracy the judiciary is regarded as the highest respectable institution, and the common man’s faith in it is unmatched. The continuous maligning, name-calling and abusing of judges is not only contempt of court and a criminal act, but it is also a slap on the face of our democratic values and Constitutional norms.
A common person has ultimate faith and trust in the judiciary, while the executives and politicians are enjoying their redtapist environment of elitism, and on the other hand the judiciary and the legal fraternity put in their effort and hard work in the poorest infrastructure of the courts and in the absence of Advocates’ Protection Act.
The recent unfortunate shootings inside courtrooms demands protection from such danger. Today the daring of social media trolls is at such a high level that no political party is spared. The so-called followers of some political leaders and the devotees of their political parties keep abusing the judiciary time and again. Whenever the Supreme Court or any high court dictates an order or pronounced a judgment which is against their political parties and political ideology, such trolls start criticising and later abusing the judges involved in the hearing of the case.
This trend has practically become normal because of inaction by the various governments including our judiciary which overlooks complaints against such offenders. This has become worse after some legal news platforms started tweeting and reporting live courtroom proceedings, including parts of exchanges between judges and lawyers, especially opposing counsels. At times such conversations between the bench and the advocates contesting the cases are given a different colour; in fact, I have been the victim of such misreporting. Despite my clarification the erroneous news was not amended or corrected. Such courtroom exchanges are actually normal and common in the eyes of the courts and the advocates, but a common man does not have any idea about this and he can form a negative opinion about the judge or advocate.
My reservation against such live reporting of courtroom proceedings is not new. Three years ago, I wrote a complaint letter to the Chief Justice of India while the live reporting and tweeting of the hearing on Arnab Goswami’s habeas corpus petition before a division bench of the Bombay High Court was going on. To my utter dismay, Twitter users were posting abuses and highly objectionable comments in respect of the honourable judges presiding over the Bench as well as for the learned senior advocates arguing the matter. It appears that even in these three years this kind of behaviour has greatly increased on social media, and the live reporting has led to the situation deteriorating even more drastically. At present there are no guidelines governing such live reporting of hearings before the courts of law and the rights and duties of readers and viewers.
In my opinion no reader or viewer should have the liberty to make or publish any per se contemptuous comment on the process of administration of justice in the court of law. It should not be treated like a ball-by-ball description during a cricket match commentary. The traditional discipline being maintained during physical hearings must also be maintained by the readers or viewers of live reporting of the hearings of the cases on social media and other platforms on the internet.
Such contemptuous comments not only scandalise the court but also bring down the reputation of the Indian judiciary as well as the prestige of India and our honourable prime minister and his government as well. This trolling and abusing is definitely not freedom of speech or freedom of press. Through this article I request the highest judiciary including the CJI, the ministry of law and justice and the ministry of information, to bring some strong controlling accountability against such unchecked live reporting of courtroom hearings and vilifying comments on judges and other Constitutional post holders.
