Judicial Reforms

Supreme Court may curb advocates from speaking on cases


Mains Paper 3: Polity | Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary Ministries

From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

Prelims level: Not Much

Mains level: Various aspects of the contempt of court


Contempt Charges for Public Proclamation

  1. The Supreme Court has agreed to examine the possibility of imposing curbs on advocates airing their views in the media about pending cases and the judges handling them.
  2. The apex court was hearing a plea on contempt petitions filed by the government and the Attorney General of India against a famous civil rights lawyer.
  3. The lawyer’s tweets willfully and deliberately” made a false statement in a case pending in court.

Freedom carries with it responsibility

  1. The SC Bench agreed that though the flash of cameras and media attention may seem irresistible to some, a line needed to be firmly drawn.
  2. Observing that “freedom carries with it a responsibility”, it noted that some lawyers even used air time to attack judges, whose code of conduct did not allow them to go public.
  3. The bench also observed that some lawyers rushed to the media as soon as their petition was filed.

Damage to the institution

  1. It can be often sees just after a judgement is pronounced it is publicly proclaimed that it is a black day, bringing disrepute to the institution.
  2. When a matter is sub judice, the lawyers are expected to maintain expected to maintain the decorum of the court and should avoid going public and being part of media and TV debate.
  3. The attack on judicial proceedings in a brazen, willful and malicious manner would tend to shake the very foundation of the justice delivery system.
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments