Table of Contents :
- The Karnataka High Court Judge’s Remark Sparks Controversy.
- The Offensive Remark.
- The Supreme Court’s Intervention.
- Guidelines laid down by Supreme Court and Apology from the Judge.
The Incident :
The usage and posting of films of court proceedings that are live
aired on YouTube is being regulated by an interim order that was issued on Tuesday. The event
happened when Justice V. srishananda of the High Court of Karnataka made offensive
statements about a female barrister and referred to Bengaluru,
which has a population of Muslims, as Pakistan. His comments were captured on camera and went viral. Taking a poor view
of the judge’s remarks, the five-judge SC bench requested a report from the HC on Friday. CJI
warned judges that “we are being watched” and urged them to use caution. The SC stated that it
will think about establishing rules to protect the proceedings’ integrity and shield them from
mockery by the general public.
Judge V Srishananda of the Karnataka High Court was chastised by the Supreme Court on
Wednesday for referring to a Bangalore neighborhood as Pakistan, arguing that such comments
compromise the nation’s geographical integrity. CJI DY Chandrachud stated, “We can’t call any
part of territory of India as Pakistan.” This occurred as the supreme court closed the suo motu
case that had been brought against Justice Srishananda after noting his apology.
The Supreme Court’s Intervention :
Additionally, the SC released instructions for judges to follow in order to maintain the dignity of
the proceedings and to prevent indiscreet comments that show personal prejudices. The SC
stated, “Courts must exercise caution and refrain from making remarks that could be construed
as misogynistic or discriminatory toward any group within society.”
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, DY Chandrachud, together with Justices Sanjiv Khanna,
BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and Hrishikesh Roy, made the observation that calls to stop live streaming
of court sessions should not be sparked by such disputes.
According to Chief Justice Chandrachud, “social media cannot be controlled.” “The answer to sunlight is more sunlight, to
ensure maximum transparency in judicial proceedings,” he stated.
Despite the petitioner lawyers Association of Bengaluru’s argument, Justice Chandanagougar
noted in his interim decision that blocking live broadcasting of court proceedings was not a way
to stop misuse. The judges believed that any infraction could be brought to the attention of the
relevant judge’s court so that the appropriate action could be taken.
Read More :https://www.inpactimes.com/manu-bhaker-response-to-trolling-why-will-i-not/
HC Judge’s Apology :
Justice Srishananda expressed sorrow for his comments made in court on Saturday.
On Saturday Justice Srishananda had expressed his concern after the supreme court had taken
a dime office reference to Muslim majority Bengaluru area as Pakistan. that his comments were
taken out of context, unintentionally posted on social media, and did not target any particular
person or group. “On social media, a few remarks made during court proceedings were
misrepresented. I sincerely apologize for any damage caused by such remarks to any person,
group, or community,” he stated. While his apology is accepted, the incident has highlighted the need for stricter guidelines and oversight to prevent similar occurences in the future.
The Supreme Court has indicated that it will consider establishing rules to protect the integrity of court proceedings and shield them from Public Mockery. The remarks were said inadvertently and with no purpose of offending any one person or group
inside society. If the concerned advocate had been there, loaded of clarified his remarks. Senior
attorney Vivek SubbaReddy pointed out that although Justice Srishananda’s ruling was
praiseworthy, his casual remarks during the hearing had an impact on attorneys since they were
streamed live by the advocates association or because they were used to misrepresent the court
proceedings.
