On Tuesday, in an open-court reflection on the growing influence of social media over judicial proceedings, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai cautioned against the misinterpretation and distortion of judge’s oral remarks made during hearings, observing that such comments are often taken out of context and circulated online without understanding their judicial setting.
The Chief Justice made the remarks while hearing a plea filed by the All India Judges Association concerning the service conditions, pay scales, and career progression of judicial officers. Sharing an anecdote in a lighter vein, CJI Gavai said, “My learned brother (Justice K Vinod Chandran) had something to comment, I stopped him from expressing it, when we were hearing the Dheeraj Mor case. Otherwise, on this social media, we do not know what will be reported. I requested my learned brother to restrict it only to my ears.”
The observation came a day after an unprecedented incident in the Supreme Court, where an elderly lawyer attempted to throw a shoe at the CJI. The lawyer was reportedly aggrieved by Justice Gavai’s remarks during an earlier hearing related to the restoration of a Vishnu idol at Khajuraho’s Javari Temple, a UNESCO World Heritage site in Madhya Pradesh.
The Bench, then led by CJI Gavai, had dismissed the plea as a “publicity interest litigation”, stating, “This is purely publicity interest litigation…. Go and ask the deity himself to do something. If you are saying that you are a strong devotee of Lord Vishnu, then you pray and do some meditation.”
Following online criticism of these remarks, the Chief Justice subsequently clarified that he “respects all religions”, emphasizing that the comment was never intended to offend any faith or belief.
Tuesday’s courtroom exchange reflects the judiciary’s growing unease over how selective excerpts from hearings, especially oral observations made spontaneously, are amplified and misinterpreted on digital platforms. The CJI’s concern highlights the need to preserve the sanctity of judicial proceedings in an era of viral narratives and fragmented reporting.
Meanwhile, in the same hearing, the Bench referred the issue of career stagnation among lower judicial officers to a five-judge Constitution Bench for further consideration, marking a step forward in the ongoing deliberations on judicial service reforms.
Source Link
Picture Source :