Days after two video clips of Karnataka High Court judge, Justice V Srishananda went viral on social media, the Advocates’ Association Bengaluru Today (Sept 23) moved the Karnataka High Court seeking directions to restrain public from editing/ morphing or illegally using live streamed videos of court proceedings. The judge later apologised for his comments after the Supreme Court took suo motu cognisnace of the comments.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Bengaluru: Days after two video clips featuring Karnataka High Court judge, Justice V Srishananda, went viral on social media, the Advocates’ Association of Bengaluru filed a petition in the Karnataka High Court seeking directions to prevent the misuse of live-streamed court proceedings.
On Monday, the Association sought urgent intervention to restrain individuals from editing, morphing, or illegally using court videos.
The plea called for-
“appropriate orders restraining all social media, individuals, video-makers, media agencies, and the general public from using, editing, morphing, or illegally using live-streamed videos of court proceedings.”
The matter was brought up for an urgent hearing before a bench led by Justice Hemant Chandangoudar. The petition also asked platforms like YouTube, Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and others to delete any videos or reels that may have been created using footage from the High Court’s live-streamed proceedings.
On September 20, the Advocates’ Association had already written to the Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, NV Anjaria, requesting the temporary suspension of live-streamed court proceedings. The Association highlighted the “dangers of live streaming,” citing the misuse of footage and its potential impact on the judiciary’s public perception.
In their plea, the President of the Association and other office bearers argued that a “whole new market on social media” had emerged, which “demonises, twists, manipulates, and criticises” court deliberations by taking clips from official live streams out of context. They emphasized that the live streaming of court proceedings enables unwarranted criticism of the judiciary and the legal profession, both of which play critical roles in societal development.
The petitioners also expressed concern for young advocates, stating,
“These videos when circulated are causing harm especially to the younger members of the Bar who are passionately learning the nuances and intricacies of the legal profession by appearing before constitutional courts.”
The High Court is expected to hear the petition on September 24.
This controversy arose after a video from a hearing conducted by Justice Srishananda on August 28 was shared on social media, where the judge referred to a Muslim-dominated area in west Bengaluru as “Pakistan.” A few hours later, another video from the same courtroom surfaced, in which Justice Srishananda made a gender-insensitive remark.
Following these incidents, Justice Srishananda issued an apology after the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of his comments.
The petition filed by the Advocates’ Association seeks to address the broader issue of live-streaming misuse and to protect the dignity of the judiciary and the legal profession from unwarranted criticism based on manipulated or edited video clips.
PREVIOUSLY IN APEX COURT
On Friday, September 20, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of video clips that have surfaced online, featuring controversial comments made by Karnataka High Court Judge, Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda, during recent hearings.
The issue was addressed by a five-judge bench, including Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and Hrishikesh Roy. The bench assembled this morning and passed an order requesting a report from the Karnataka High Court.
The controversy arose after two video clips of Justice Srishananda were circulated on social media. In one of the videos, the judge referred to a locality in Bangalore as “Pakistan.” In a separate clip, he was heard making objectionable remarks directed at a woman advocate, which triggered widespread concerns over the appropriateness of such comments in a judicial setting.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, commenting on the matter, stated:
“The attention of the court has been drawn to media reports pertaining to certain comments made by KHC Justice V Srishananda. We have requested the Attorney General and Solicitor General to assist this court, and we request the Karnataka High Court’s Registrar General to submit a report after seeking administrative directions from the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court.”
The report, once completed, will be submitted to the Registrar General of the Supreme Court.
The court has scheduled the matter to be taken up again on Wednesday, allowing time for the Karnataka High Court to investigate the issue and submit its findings. This development highlights the Supreme Court’s immediate concern with maintaining the decorum and integrity of judicial proceedings across courts in India.
BACKGROUND
Bengaluru: Karnataka High Court judge, Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda, is facing intense scrutiny after two separate video clips of his courtroom remarks surfaced on social media, both of which have drawn widespread outrage.
In the first video, which went viral earlier, Justice Srishananda referred to a Muslim-dominated sub-locality in West Bengaluru as “Pakistan.” This comment quickly attracted criticism, with many questioning the appropriateness of such a remark, particularly from a sitting judge.
Shortly after this incident, another video of the judge emerged, where he is seen making a gender-insensitive comment during a court session. In the clip, Justice Srishananda reprimands a woman lawyer for responding to a question that had been directed to the counsel for the opposite party. When the woman lawyer interjects, confirming that the person in question was an income tax assessee, the judge responds by questioning her reasons for answering.
“Wait amma,”
-Justice Srishananda says, addressing the woman lawyer who then apologizes for her interruption. The judge continues, stating,
“You know everything of him. If asked tomorrow, you will tell what colour of undergarment he wears,”
-while smiling.
This comment was made in Kannada, and it reportedly elicited smiles from the other counsel present in the courtroom, though the remarks have sparked outrage outside the courtroom.
The videos have provoked a strong response on social media, with many calling for accountability and action against the judge. Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, a prominent voice on gender rights, took to her X (formerly Twitter) account to share the video, demanding that Justice Srishananda be sent for gender sensitization training.
“We call upon the Chief Justice of India to take suo motu action against this judge and send him for gender sensitization training,”
-Jaising posted on X, echoing the growing sentiment that strict action is necessary.
These incidents have amplified public discourse around judicial conduct and gender sensitivity within the legal system. The controversy has also underscored the importance of respectful language and conduct from those in positions of authority, particularly in a courtroom setting, where decorum is essential.
As outrage continues to build, many are awaiting further developments, with calls for the judiciary to take prompt action and address the concerns raised by these remarks.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Viral Court Videos
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
