In social media age, judges must speak less, even after retirement: Supreme Court Justice PS Narasimha

Judges must try to resist the temptation to speak beyond what they write in their judgments, particularly in the age of social media where every word is reported, Supreme Court Justice PS Narasimha said on Saturday.

He added that judges must resist the temptation of speaking more, particularly after retirement.

“We seem to have moved away (from restraint in speech) with social media and requirement to speak so much. Every word gets reported in the news, and sitting judges might get attracted. And worse is post retirement, judges think that 'time has come when I have to talk now', as if it is a full time talk. I think that’s not the way the system should work," he noted.

It is the judgment which must speak and not the judge, Justice Narasimha said while lauding his colleague Justice AS Chandurkar for being one such judge who lets his judgments speak for him.

"I believe that justice dispensation requires disappearance of a judge. Judge should not be seen, judge has no business to be there in the process, except that he decides. His personality as an individual …  all this is unnecessary. Judge does nothing more than he decides, and he disappears. He (Justice Chandurkar) is a judge who has disappeared, but his decisions only speak and they speak volumes," Justice Narasimha said.

Justice Narasimha was speaking at a felicitation ceremony organised by the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court Bar Association for Justice Chandurkar.

In his address, Justice Narasimha reflected on how the legal profession constantly grapples with two values - speech and truth. For lawyers, speech is essential in advocacy, while for judges, it finds expression in written judgments, Justice Narasimha said.

The challenge lies in ensuring that both advocacy and judging remain instruments for uncovering truth.

“The decipherment of truth is the purpose and object of the judiciary, and the means of finding that truth is through dialogue, through argument before the court," he noted.

He stressed that restraint must guide both lawyers and judges on how much they need to speak. He observed that for lawyers, this means there should be brevity in arguments. He added that for judges, it means there should be precision in judgments.

"The compelling need of a judge is to speak less – which doesn’t really happen anyway – and to write little, to write precise and to write as small as possible and to convey the truth. That is where the truth will be glaring. This is a sadhana or an exercise which we have to undertake," he said.

Justice Narasimha underlined that the discipline of restraint should always be the guiding principle.

“Measured speech, measured talk - think before you say. See if (what you are saying) actually leads to truth and whether than speech leads to prosperity to one and all," he said.

He observed that Justice Chandurkar exemplified these values of restraint. He recalled how in one arbitration dispute, his colleague delivered a crisp judgment excluding all irrelevant facts and focusing only on what mattered.

“Restraint in speech is Justice Chandurkar’s quality. The judgement was so beautifully crafted, so precise, that I was a bit jealous. This is a quality. It doesn’t come automatically. It is a sadhana. You need to train yourself to argue. You need to train yourself to write," he said.

In his ensuing address, Justice Chandurkar turned to his own journey from the Bar to the Bench. He said that no matter how far one rises in the legal profession, ties with the parent Bar remain permanent.

“The ties with the parent Bar are never severed. In fact, one is always recognised as a product of the parent Bar and that identity is never wiped out. The Bar has contributed immensely and played a positive role in my judicial journey.”

He recalled the collective efforts of the legal fraternity during the COVID-19 pandemic and said the Nagpur Bar had ingrained in him the spirit of working together rather than individually.

He also shared fond memories from his 25 years as a lawyer - arriving in court before 10:30 AM to mention matters, waiting until late in the afternoon for cases to be called, learning court craft from seniors, and even picking up lessons from mistakes. These experiences, he said, instilled patience and prepared him for the Bench.

Justice Chandurkar also praised Justice Narasimha, calling it a privilege to be felicitated by him. He referred to his colleague’s recent judgment on the All India Football Federation, which applied constitutional principles to sporting governance. He read out a passage from the judgment that described sporting facilities as material resources of the community that must remain accessible and efficiently run.

He reminded the gathering that three sitting Supreme Court judges representing the Bombay High Court, including himself and Justice Narasimha and Chief Justice BR Gavai, have strong connections with Nagpur, and urged younger members of the legal profession to take pride in this legacy. He said that Nagpur was no less promising a centre of practice than Mumbai or Delhi.

“Nagpur holds as much promise for the Bar as do Mumbai and Delhi. From my personal experience, I can say with confidence that Nagpur is a court of great potential and hope for the future," he said.

Justice Chandurkar concluded his speech with a reminder that the worth of a lawyer lies not in victories or defeats, but in how one conducts oneself.

“At the end of the day, you are not judged by the number of cases you have won or lost. You are judged by the manner in which you have conducted yourself in the process. Your overall conduct carries far more weight than the statistics of success or failure, which are merely incidental," he said.