JUDGMENT :

I.A.No.1 of 2021

1. The Registrar General has lodged a complaint with respondent No.5 against some unknown persons who had posted defamatory material against learned Judges of this Court making wild, baseless and untenable statements on social media and sought for immediate action to trace the said culprits and to take steps for removal of defamatory material. As the defamatory comments on social media platform were continued unabated, another report was lodged, which was registered as F.I.R No.17 of 2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 505 (2) and 506 of IPC. Posting of defamatory and abusing comments on social media platforms increased multi-fold, as there is no progress in the investigation, the present writ petition came to be filed.

2. Internet and social media have become vital communication tools for exercising freedom of speech, expression and exchange of information and ideas. Social Media platforms have the ability to spread the communication globally. Absence of pre-screening and control of the intermediaries enable the users to successfully upload any material. In this process, fake, harmful, even hate speeches are uploaded. The aggrieved are left helpless, as the intermediaries do not pull down the content unless there is a Court order or on the complaint by the prosecution agency. In several cases, there is undue delay in registering the complaint by the prosecution agency, further delay in addressing the intermediaries. By the time the content is removed, the targeted goal of tarnishing the image of the person/spreading the fake news is achieved. The Judges and the institution of Judiciary are no exception to this phenomenon.

3. In a politically polarized environment the Judges and the institution of Judiciary have become soft targets for the organized campaigns. Political rivals become active on social media, attempts are made to influence the proceedings and intimidate the Judges. After the Judgments/orders are passed, the aggrieved party vigorously starts a vilification campaign by imputing motives to the Judges and attempts are made to malign the institutional reputation. Legitimate criticism is always welcomed in a democracy. But there is a thin line between legitimate criticism and making abusive, irrational, scandalous, unsavoury personal attacks undermining the Majesty of the institution and the authority vested in the Judges. If these kind of imputations are left unanswered over a period of time common man who is unconnected with these unscrupulous elements will start believing that there is something thoroughly wrong with the system and his faith in the system will erode. It will ultimately lead to undermining the confidence of the people in the sacred institution and interference with the course of administration of justice. As rightly said the silence of law men will do more harm than the violence of layman. Criticism must not be double sided sword, which aims at creating distress in the society.

4. “Judge Bashing” and using derogatory and contemptuous language against Judges has become a favourite pass time of some people. These statements tend to scandalize and lower the authority of the Courts and cannot be permitted because, for functioning of democracy, an independent judiciary to dispense justice without fear and favour is paramount. Its strength is the faith and confidence of the people in that institution. That cannot be permitted to be undermined because that will be against the public interest. Judiciary should not be reduced to the position of flies in the hands of wanton boys. Judge bashing is not and cannot be a substitute for constructive criticism. [Haridas Das Vs. Usha Rani Banik and Ors. (2007) 14 SCC 1].

5. The Constitution of India guarantees to its citizens freedom of speech and expression which is sacred to individual liberty and democracy. But the founders of the Constitution are aware about the co-existence of conflicting rights and restriction and enacted Artic