Profuse Misuse Of Social Media Platforms By Posting Articles On Pending Matters Is A Matter Of Serious Concern: SC While Issuing Contempt Notice To Assam AIUDF MLA
|The Supreme Court, while issuing a notice to Assam MLA Karim Uddin Barbhuiya of the All India United Democratic Front for his post on his Facebook account, condemned the profuse misuse of the social media platforms, posting distorting facts and not disclosing the correct facts of the court proceedings, under the guise of the right to freedom of speech and expression.
The Court said that this issue deserves serious consideration as such posts/comments have the tendency of undermining the authority of the Courts, consequently, interfering with the course of justice and causing prejudice to the proceedings.
The Bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M Trivedi said, “We prima facie find substance in the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner. It is a matter of serious concern that nowadays there has been a profuse misuse of social media platforms on which the messages, comments, articles etc. are being posted in respect of the matters pending in the Court. Though, our shoulders are broad enough to bear any blame or criticism, the comments or posts published in respect of the matters pending in the Court, through social media platforms under the guise of right to freedom of speech and expression, which have the tendency of undermining the authority of the Courts or of interfering with the course of justice, deserves serious consideration.”
Senior Advocates Jaideep Gupta and Dileep Majumdar appeared for the Petitioner while Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy appeared for the Respondents.
The contempt petition was filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by Aminul Haque Laskar who is a Congress MLA from Assam. The Supreme Court reserved the judgment between both parties in Civil Appeal Karim Uddin Barbhuiya v. Aminul Haque Laskar & Ors., after which the alleged contemnor published a post on his Facebook Account saying that the Supreme Court had ruled in his favour and that allegations against him had fallen flat. The Civil Appeal was thereafter allowed.
The Court also observed, “It is very usual that the Judges do react during the course of arguments being made by the lawyers, sometimes in favour of and sometimes against a party to the proceeding. However, that does not give any right or leeway to either of the parties or their lawyers to the proceedings to post comments or messages on the social media distorting the facts or not disclosing the correct facts of the proceedings. The matter is required to be taken up more seriously when any such attempt is sought to be made by the party to the proceedings to cause prejudice to the proceedings or interfere with the course of administration of justice.”
Accordingly, the issued notice to the alleged contemnor and directed the Registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.
Cause Title: Aminul Haque Laskar v. Karim Uddin Barbhuiya & Ors.
Appearances:
Petitioner: Senior Advocates Jaideep Gupta, Dileep Majumdar, Advocates Adeel Ahmed, Abdur Razzaque Bhuyan, Raja Chatterjee, Racheet Chawla, Sana Parveen, Piyush Sachdev, Anupama Gupta, Riya Dutta and Supratik
Respondents: Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, Advocates Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Mustafa Khaddam Hussain and Ibad Mushtaq.