Supreme Court Won’t Tolerate Distortion Of Facts By Way Of Social Media Comments

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has expressed its displeasure in no uncertain terms over the misuse of social media.

Unhappy with comments being made on pending cases in social media, the country’s top court said it will not tolerate distortion of facts.

A two-judge bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M Trivedi was on Wednesday hearing a contempt petition filed by Congress’ Aminul Haque Laskar against All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) leader and Assam MLA Karim Uddin Barbhuiya.

“Court’s shoulders were broad enough to deal with criticism. It is a matter of serious concern that nowadays there has been a profuse misuse of social media platforms on which messages, comments, articles etc. are being posted in respect of the matters pending in the Court,” noted Justice Bose, who retired on Wednesday, and Justice Trivedi.

According to the Supreme Court, posts on social media platforms under the guise of right to freedom of speech and expression — which undermines the authority of courts or of interfering with the course of justice — deserves serious consideration.

In his contempt plea, Laskar stated that the AIUDF leader claimed in a Facebook post last month that he (Barbhuiya) had won a case when the top court had only reserved its judgment in the matter.

“It was very usual that the judges do react during the course of arguments being made by the lawyers, sometimes in favour and sometimes against a party to the proceeding. But that did not give any right to either of the parties or their lawyers to post comments or messages on the social media distorting the facts or not disclosing the correct facts of the proceedings,” the top court said, and asked Barbhuiya to respond to the contempt case filed against him.

Stating that such conduct, when parties attempt to interfere with pending proceedings and prejudice the administration of justice, should be taken up extremely seriously, the court set further hearing in the case after four weeks.

The court also ordered that a copy of the order should be sent to the AG of India.