Judges deliberately refrain from watching Television (TV) or tracking news on social media platforms like Twitter so that they can come to courts with a fresh mind and hear cases without prejudice, the Bombay High Court remarked on Tuesday. .A Bench of Justices SS Shinde and MS Karnik Court said that holding a public office in a democratic country would automatically make them subjects of scrutiny and criticism. It was for this reason that judges did not read anything on Twitter or watch TV so that they can have a neutral stand when they hear matters in court, the Bench added. "We judges have been asked not to watch TV, twitter, we don't know anything. We come to the courts with a fresh mind," Justice Shinde said. .We judges have been asked not to watch TV, twitter, we don't know anything. We come to the courts with a fresh mind.Justice SS Shinde.The Court was hearing a plea by Sunaina Holey seeking quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) registered against her by the Mumbai Police for allegedly making objectionable statements against Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and Cabinet Minister Aaditya Thackeray on Twitter..Advocate (Dr.) Abhinav Chandrachud, appearing for Holey, submitted that Holey was merely expressing her opinion and criticising a policy of the government. He added that "a fundamental right to speech of a citizen cannot be curtailed.".Court agreed with his submission but quickly pointed out that they also had to ensure that “fundamental right of one person does not cause harm to another person.”.If we do not allow younger generation to express how will they know what they are expressing is right and wrong.”Justice SS Shinde.When Chandrachud showed the Court the objectionable content against which the complaint was filed against Holey, the Court wondered “if the police will act against every person who says something on Twitter?”. “A democratic society has to find a balance between the societal and individual rights,” Justice Shinde said. .He added that the younger generation should be allowed to speak their minds.“If we do not allow younger generation to express how will they know what they are expressing is right and wrong.”.When the Court indicated that prima facie they do not agree with the prosecution case, Additional Public Prosecutor JP Yagnik pleaded that the Court should not grant relief to Holey just yet..Will the Police act against every person who says something on Twitter ?Bombay High Court.He contended that the case was being investigated and it was important to know the intention behind such tweets. .After hearing both parties, the Court sought their assistance on certain legal issues..Yagnik was asked to assist the Court on whether or not it can quash an FIR when the investigation was ongoing..Chandrachud was directed to make submissions on whether the Court should quash the FIR based on the contents of the FIR or whether it should wait till the investigation is over before exercising its jurisdiction. The case will be taken up for hearing again on December 3, 2020.
Judges deliberately refrain from watching Television (TV) or tracking news on social media platforms like Twitter so that they can come to courts with a fresh mind and hear cases without prejudice, the Bombay High Court remarked on Tuesday. .A Bench of Justices SS Shinde and MS Karnik Court said that holding a public office in a democratic country would automatically make them subjects of scrutiny and criticism. It was for this reason that judges did not read anything on Twitter or watch TV so that they can have a neutral stand when they hear matters in court, the Bench added. "We judges have been asked not to watch TV, twitter, we don't know anything. We come to the courts with a fresh mind," Justice Shinde said. .We judges have been asked not to watch TV, twitter, we don't know anything. We come to the courts with a fresh mind.Justice SS Shinde.The Court was hearing a plea by Sunaina Holey seeking quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) registered against her by the Mumbai Police for allegedly making objectionable statements against Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and Cabinet Minister Aaditya Thackeray on Twitter..Advocate (Dr.) Abhinav Chandrachud, appearing for Holey, submitted that Holey was merely expressing her opinion and criticising a policy of the government. He added that "a fundamental right to speech of a citizen cannot be curtailed.".Court agreed with his submission but quickly pointed out that they also had to ensure that “fundamental right of one person does not cause harm to another person.”.If we do not allow younger generation to express how will they know what they are expressing is right and wrong.”Justice SS Shinde.When Chandrachud showed the Court the objectionable content against which the complaint was filed against Holey, the Court wondered “if the police will act against every person who says something on Twitter?”. “A democratic society has to find a balance between the societal and individual rights,” Justice Shinde said. .He added that the younger generation should be allowed to speak their minds.“If we do not allow younger generation to express how will they know what they are expressing is right and wrong.”.When the Court indicated that prima facie they do not agree with the prosecution case, Additional Public Prosecutor JP Yagnik pleaded that the Court should not grant relief to Holey just yet..Will the Police act against every person who says something on Twitter ?Bombay High Court.He contended that the case was being investigated and it was important to know the intention behind such tweets. .After hearing both parties, the Court sought their assistance on certain legal issues..Yagnik was asked to assist the Court on whether or not it can quash an FIR when the investigation was ongoing..Chandrachud was directed to make submissions on whether the Court should quash the FIR based on the contents of the FIR or whether it should wait till the investigation is over before exercising its jurisdiction. The case will be taken up for hearing again on December 3, 2020.
