Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court today said that halting live streaming of Karnataka High Court proceedings on social media is not the solution while addressing recent calls from sections of the legal fraternity. These demands followed a viral incident involving remarks made by Karnataka High Court judge Justice V Srishananda during a hearing that was shared on YouTube.

While Solicitor General raised concerns over the misuse of court footage on social media, the Supreme Court made it clear that restricting transparency is not the solution.

"The answer to sunlight is more sunlight...The solution is not to close doors and shut everything down", court said. 

It, however, recognized that both the judges and the lawyers need to maintain appropriate conduct in light of the increasing reach of digital platforms and public scrutiny.

The five-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant, and Hrishikesh Roy was hearing the suo motu case initiated against the Karnataka High Court judge for his controversial remarks.

The judge had referred to a Muslim-majority area of Bengaluru as “Pakistan” during a hearing in a landlord-tenant case. In another incident, he pulled up a lady advocate on answering a question out of turn and had said that, as she knew a lot about the opposite party, she could even reveal the colour of his undergarment.

However, upon suo motu cognizance of the incidents by the top court, the judge had rendered an apology in the open court. 

Accepting the same, the Supreme Court today decided to close the suo motu proceedings. 

It opined, "The perception of justice to every segment of society is as important as the rendition of justice as an objective fact. Since the judge of the Karnataka High Court is not a party to the proceedings, we desist from making any further observations, saving except to express our serious concern about both the reference to gender and a segment of the community. Such observations are liable to be construed in a negative light, thereby impacting not only the court of the judge who expressed that but also the wider judicial system".

Case Title: IN RE: Remarks by High Court Judge during Court Proceedings