The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Tuesday initiated suo moto contempt of court proceedings against YouTuber and blogger Savukku Shankar for Tweets making personal attacks on Justice GR Swaminathan..The order was passed by the judge in open court on Tuesday morning, opining that he usually did not pay heed to Shankar's criticism but his latest tweet had crossed the lakshman rekha. He emphasised that even strident criticism was permissible but defamatory vilification was not. "While even strident criticism is permissible, defamatory vilification is not. He has been focusing his gaze on me for the past several months. He had commented on many of my judgements in the most uncharitable language. His attacks have often been personal. Since I am a strong believer and upholding freedom of speech and expression I did not pay heed to them. however his latest tweet appears not crossed the lakshman rekha," the order read. .Considering the larger issues in the case, the registry of the court was also asked to implead social media intermediaries such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to the case. The Secretary to Government, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) was also suo motu impleaded to the case..The Court had taken exception to certain tweets by Shankar which suggested that the outcome of a case relating to another well-known YoutTuber Maridhas was influenced by someone the judge allegedly met. "This is clearly scandalizing the judiciary. Prima facie Thiru. Shankar had committed criminal contempt," the Court said. .While addressing allegations made by Shankar in his tweets, Justice Swaminathan attached a record of case disposals made by him in the last five years. The judge further noted that he was able to achieve good results by sitting 9.30 am onwards in the morning, and beyond court hours."For the salary drawn by me and the perquisites enjoyed, I believe I have worked to the fullest," the order said..The Court also recorded the irony of the fact that Shankar was employed in the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption as ministerial staff. In this regard, it was emphasised that the State government was obliged to make a statement regarding the disciplinary action taken against him. "A person who is getting paid by the state without doing any work has the audacity to mock at a judge who feels he must justify every paise that he gets from the exchequer.".Referring to the responsibility of intermediaries, Justice Swaminathan said that these entities had compliance officers and it was their duty to ensure that content scandalising judges and judiciary was not posted, and if posted the same was taken down. A reference was made to observations by Supreme Court Judge, Justice JB Pardiwala at a recent lecture calling for regulations to contain social media attacks on judges and the negative impact of trial by media..Therefore, being prima facie satisfied that Shankar had exceeded his limits, the directory was asked to register a criminal case against him. He was asked to appear in person before the court, while the compliance officers of various social media intermediaries were allowed to appear through their counsel. The compliance officers were also asked to file an affidavit with details of complaints received against Shankar, as well as action taken on them. "They shall also make a statement as to whether they had considered taking suo motu action to uphold and safeguard the dignity of the Indian judiciary," the judge directed. .[Read Order]
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Tuesday initiated suo moto contempt of court proceedings against YouTuber and blogger Savukku Shankar for Tweets making personal attacks on Justice GR Swaminathan..The order was passed by the judge in open court on Tuesday morning, opining that he usually did not pay heed to Shankar's criticism but his latest tweet had crossed the lakshman rekha. He emphasised that even strident criticism was permissible but defamatory vilification was not. "While even strident criticism is permissible, defamatory vilification is not. He has been focusing his gaze on me for the past several months. He had commented on many of my judgements in the most uncharitable language. His attacks have often been personal. Since I am a strong believer and upholding freedom of speech and expression I did not pay heed to them. however his latest tweet appears not crossed the lakshman rekha," the order read. .Considering the larger issues in the case, the registry of the court was also asked to implead social media intermediaries such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to the case. The Secretary to Government, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) was also suo motu impleaded to the case..The Court had taken exception to certain tweets by Shankar which suggested that the outcome of a case relating to another well-known YoutTuber Maridhas was influenced by someone the judge allegedly met. "This is clearly scandalizing the judiciary. Prima facie Thiru. Shankar had committed criminal contempt," the Court said. .While addressing allegations made by Shankar in his tweets, Justice Swaminathan attached a record of case disposals made by him in the last five years. The judge further noted that he was able to achieve good results by sitting 9.30 am onwards in the morning, and beyond court hours."For the salary drawn by me and the perquisites enjoyed, I believe I have worked to the fullest," the order said..The Court also recorded the irony of the fact that Shankar was employed in the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption as ministerial staff. In this regard, it was emphasised that the State government was obliged to make a statement regarding the disciplinary action taken against him. "A person who is getting paid by the state without doing any work has the audacity to mock at a judge who feels he must justify every paise that he gets from the exchequer.".Referring to the responsibility of intermediaries, Justice Swaminathan said that these entities had compliance officers and it was their duty to ensure that content scandalising judges and judiciary was not posted, and if posted the same was taken down. A reference was made to observations by Supreme Court Judge, Justice JB Pardiwala at a recent lecture calling for regulations to contain social media attacks on judges and the negative impact of trial by media..Therefore, being prima facie satisfied that Shankar had exceeded his limits, the directory was asked to register a criminal case against him. He was asked to appear in person before the court, while the compliance officers of various social media intermediaries were allowed to appear through their counsel. The compliance officers were also asked to file an affidavit with details of complaints received against Shankar, as well as action taken on them. "They shall also make a statement as to whether they had considered taking suo motu action to uphold and safeguard the dignity of the Indian judiciary," the judge directed. .[Read Order]
