In a pointed administrative directive, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has issued stringent instructions to all judicial magistrates across the State to ensure strict adherence to binding judicial precedent when ordering remand, particularly in matters involving allegations arising from social media content. The circular explicitly warns that deviation from these requirements may expose erring magistrates to contempt proceedings and departmental action.
The Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court issued the circular pursuant to concerns raised over the indiscriminate remand of accused persons in cases linked to online speech and commentary. It was brought to the High Court’s notice that magistrates were routinely remanding individuals in such matters without evaluating compliance with the procedural safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and more recently, Imran Pratap Gadhi v. State of Gujarath.
Although the circular does not arise from adversarial litigation, the content reflects an institutional response to perceived non-compliance with binding precedent. The circular incorporates principles from two landmark judgments. In Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court issued guidelines to curb unnecessary arrestas under offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. In Imran Pratap Gadhi v. State of Gujarath, the Supreme Court emphasized the protection of free expression and mandated a preliminary inquiry before FIR registration in cases involving speech, writing, or artistic expression, unless such inquiry is duly sanctioned by a Deputy Superintendent of Police and concluded within 14 days.
The circular sets out explicit procedural safeguards that must be observed. It states, “It has been brought to the notice of the High Court that most of the Judicial Magistrates are remanding the accused in cases pertaining to social media postings/comments without adhering to the principles laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar case.”
Further, it quotes the Apex Court’s observations in Imran Pratap Gadhi v. State of Gujarath, noting that the judgment seeks“to prevent misuse of criminal law to stifle free expression.”
Accordingly, the High Court instructed that before granting remand, magistrates must ensure,“that the Investigating Officer complied with the law laid down in ‘Arnesh Kumar’ and ‘Imran Pratap Gadhi’ cases that the accused had committed repeated and multiple offences, that the accused, if not ordered to be remanded to judicial custody, may influence the witnesses or tamper evidence that the police require custodial investigation.”
The High Court has made clear that “All the Judicial Magistrates shall follow the circular instructions, scrupulously, and any deviation in this regard will be viewed very seriously. The Judicial Magistrates who violate the circular would render themselves liable for contempt of the High Court besides facing departmental enquiry.”
Picture Source :
