Andhra Pradesh High Court denies man bail for derogatory Facebook posts against High Court judges

The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently rejected a bail plea by a petitioner who posted allegedly derogatory comments against judges of the High Court on Facebook (Sudduluri Ajay Amruth @ Gowthami K v. The State of Andhra Pradesh)..While dismissing the plea, Justice D Ramesh held,"On perusal of the postings made by all the persons against some of the Judges of the High Court as well as Apex Court can be construed as a conspiracy against an institution...The allegations made against the judges come within the purview of scandalizing the Courts.".The Registrar-General of the High Court lodged a complaint against the petitioner and a few others for making derogatory comments against judges on Facebook. The role of the accused in the case was that he expressed anger against judgments given by the judges of the High Court on his Facebook account..The respondent argued that the investigation was in process, the Central Bureau of Investigation had filed a police custody petition in a Court below and the same was pending. It was further submitted that the petitioner was an influential person and should he be enlarged on bail, there was a possibility of him influencing the witnesses..On the contrary, Senior Advocate CV Mohan Reddy, appearing for the petitioners, stated that investigation was complete, and that the petitioner had accepted that he had posted and shared the articles on Facebook. It was further stated that he would cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions imposed on him..However, the Court was unconvinced by the arguments of the petitioner. The single-Judge shed light on how “puissant” the petitioner was since the State authorities did not investigate the crime. Even though the matter was transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), it took almost a year for arrests to take place, the Court noted..Additionally, Justice Ramesh took the view that the posts could be construed as a conspiracy and attack against the institution considering the number of people who made them.“Large number of persons have made postings in social media and continued to put postings from April 2020, even till today. That shows that these persons are putting postings in social media not against the individual judges. It should be construed as an attack on the institution.”.Stating that, “the petitioner is small but there might be big persons behind this conspiracy,” the Court dismissed the bail plea..[Read Order]