The Allahabad High Court has cautioned social media users against posting abusive comments targeting the judiciary. It stressed that such remarks exceed fair criticism and may lead to serious consequences under contempt law for those who make them.
The Allahabad High Court warned social media users against using abusive language towards the judiciary online, stating that such remarks go beyond fair criticism and could result in severe consequences under contempt law.
A division bench, including Justices J J Munir and Pramod Kumar Srivastava, emphasized that insults directed at higher courts on social media cannot be deemed fair commentary or informed critique of a ruling.
The bench remarked,
“We do wish to remind the public to be cautious in future, because words that are most unambiguously contumacious, circulate on the social media which as and when taken cognisance of in our contempt jurisdiction, may expose the contemnor to penalties of the law, which the court may not hesitate to impose,”
The court highlighted that such insults clearly violate the limits of acceptable free speech.
ALSO READ: Gurugram Court Clash || Bar Association to Approach High Court Against Judge
This statement arose during a criminal contempt reference under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, related to the actions of advocate Hari Narayan Pandey at a district court in Basti.
The bench firmly asserted that abusive comments on social media targeting superior courts “by no means can fall within the fold of fair comment or the informed criticism of a judgment.”
Regarding the specifics of the case, the court mentioned that the contemnor appeared before it without attempting to rationalize his comments, admitting he was experiencing extreme distress at the time due to personal issues.
The bench also noted his behavior in court, expressing confidence that he is a well-respected practitioner aware of legal protocols and courtroom decorum.
ALSO READ: FIR Against a Sitting Judge: Legal Provisions, Judicial Precedents & Inquiry Process
In its ruling, dated February 24, the court decided to terminate the contempt proceedings, stating,
“He has put in long years of practice and there is nothing to show that he has indulged in contumacious conduct in the past. He has tendered unconditional apology at the earliest, which the learned Civil Judge accepted, of course, for himself. We are convinced that it was an expression of genuine remorse and not merely a contrivance to escape the consequences of contempt.”
Nevertheless, the court reiterated that social media users must exercise caution and adhere to lawful criticism when expressing opinions about judicial matters.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
