Social media attacks on Court: Andhra Pradesh HC expresses anguish over slow progress in CBI probe

The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Friday expressed its anguish over the delays noticed in the CBI probe underway into derogatory and scandalous comments being made on social media against High Court Judges and the judiciary ( The High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati v. State of Andhra Pradesh ).

. Noting that there has been little progress since the case was entrusted with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) last year , the Bench of Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Lalitha Kanneganti also voiced concern over the plight of common citizens if trolling against the High Court is being handled in such a slow manner.

. In an order passed on Thursday, the Court had observed that " except periodically filing of reports before the Courts, the CBI is unable to show what is the substantial development that has taken place in the investigation."

. The Court on Thursday had also ordered for the presence of the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Vishakapatnam in Court the following day.

. On Friday, the Chief Justice orally observed,

" This petition was filed to cleanse the system and to keep away persons who are maligning and tarnishing the system. But you (CBI) are converting this as if High Court is the first informant, as if the crime is against High Court. It is equally a crime against every citizen of the country ... if things were not delayed, we would not have questioned. It is only because of this delay ... It should have been done expeditiously. We did this not for ourselves, we may go somewhere else. But the institution will remain. "

. Advocate R Subhash appearing for the CBI on Friday, told the Court that the agency would be able to complete the probe faster if the social media intermediaries concerned would share information regarding the social media user.

. He submitted that two letters were sent to YouTube in December last year to take down nine offensive videos, which did not yield any action.

. The Court, however, was not impressed with this stance and questioned whether the CBI did not have the wherewithal to trace the culprits, especially considering that one such alleged offender had posted a video of himself.

. " This matter was entrusted in 2020 , what is the progress? ... You put in an affidavit that you do not have the wherewithal to find. You say you cannot identify a person in this country. This is absolutely incorrect in the face of it. You can do it, but you are saying that you cannot. What is this that you cannot identify a person in this country who has posted a video? ...

... It is extremely sorry that you cannot identify an accused who has uploaded a video? What investigation you are doing in this country? You are doing all big investigations.. you are saying you cannot come to the rescue of the High Court?", the Chief Justice asked.

. Efforts on to trace "Punch Prabhakar" . In particular, a vlogger who goes by the name " Punch Prabhakar " in his YouTube channel came under the High Court's scanner, among other social media users.

. An interim application (IA) filed on behalf of the High Court Registrar General on October 27, which had raised grievance over unsavoury social media comments against judges continuing unabated, had also highlighted the said vlogger's activities.

. The IA added that the vlogger has been targetting judges with derogatory and defamatory comments despite the registration of an FIR against him and contempt notices from the High Court.

. The CBI counsel, as well as the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Vishakapatnam informed the Court that the agency has been in touch with the Interpol and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as part of its efforts to trace "Punch Prabhakar", who is stated to be operating out of the United States of America.

. Will take down offensive content if URLs are shared: Intermediaries . Meanwhile, various Senior Counsel appearing for social media intermediaries such as WhatsApp, Twitter, YouTube and Google reassured the Court that if any offensive URL is shared with the intermediaries, they would act to take down the offensive content on the Court's orders.

. It was also submitted that basic details of social media accounts such as basic subscriber data can be shared if a request is made by a law enforcement agency or an order passed by the Court.

. Appearing for Google Inc, Twitter Inc and YouTube, Senior Advocate Sajan Poovayya told the Court,

" At least for the intermediaries I appear for, I am making solemn submission that all that we need is the offending URLs. We will not sit in judgment, we will remove the URLs forthwith. If an order is passed compiling a series of URLs - we will forthwith remove it. The law gives 36 hours, we will remove it faster ."

. The Court, in turn, suggested that it would pass an order directing the High Court Registrar General to give the URLs of offending social media content to the designated officer of social media intermediaries, with a copy to the CBI. The social media intermediaries may delete such content and the prosecution should be conducted in all earnest by the CBI under the monitoring of its Director, the Court said.

. The Court added that it would direct the CBI Director to file an affidavit on the status of investigation after a certain period as well. The CBI's counsel today urged that this affidavit may be filed by the Joint Director instead, under the supervision of the CBI.

. Appearing for the High Court, however, Advocate N Ashwin Kumar countered that the affidavit should ideally be under the sign and seal of the CBI Director itself.

. The hearing today also saw advocate Kumar reiterate concerns outlined in the High Court's IA that the social media abuse against High Court judges has continued unabated.

. "Inspite of the discussion that occurred yesterday, the observations made by your Lordships, the seriousness attached yesterday, the concerns expressed by you Lordships, please see the manner in which this forum is being used to abuse the Constitutional authority of this Court," Advocate Kumar said while referring to various social media posts.

. He also informed that certain offensive content uploaded on Facebook had been pulled down after the High Court hearing in the matter on Thursday. This, however, led the Court to question whether or not the social media intermediary had made correct submissions on Thursday when it said that it could only pull down content after an order is passed by the Court.

. " How did it (deletion of content on Facebook) happen, when the day before, you said we need order of court?What is this happening? Why should false statement be made in the court?", the Chief Justice asked.

. Appearing for Facebook, advocate Tejas Karia informed that the action had not come from the side of Facebook and that the person who uploaded the post may have taken it down. He added that this can be submitted on affidavit as well.

. Google India, Twitter India etc. may be deleted from array of parties . During the course of the hearing today, the Court was also urged to delete the Indian counterparts of Google Inc, Twitter Inc and Facebook Inc from the array of parties. The Court was told that the entities responsible for acting on the Court's orders would be the parent organisation and not the Indian entities. Certain employees of Google India were also requested to be deleted from the party array on the same ground.

. The detailed order of the Court in the matter is awaited. The Court adjourned the proceedings after intimating that it would pass an order soon.

. As the Court hearing for the day drew to an end, the Court added that it does not hold anything against the CBI or any intermediary. The Court's remarks stem from the pain and anguish over the delays in the progress of the case, the Chief Justice assured.

. " We hope that the investigation comes to an end at the earliest with the CBI and all intermediaries doing their best ", the Chief Justice added.

. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for WhatsApp and Senior Advocate L Ravichander appeared for Google India today. Other counsel who appeared in the matter include Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi and Advocates RS Ahluwalia and Saransh Jain for various social media entities.

. [Read Order dated October 28, 2021]

Social media attacks on Court: Andhra Pradesh HC expresses anguish over slow progress in CBI probe

Bar & Bench

Related Stories