Read Time: 06 minutes

The Kerala High Court in an order observed that lawyers ought to read a judgement before passing comments on the same. 

Justice PV Kunhikrishnan said, 

"The Bench and Bar are two sides of a coin. The lawyers should be the mouthpiece of the judiciary. A fair criticism about a judgment is always acceptable. But the criticism can be started only after reading the judgment. Such a culture is to be developed for which the lawyer community has got pivotal role."

The Court was deciding on a plea filed by Peggy Fen which sought a prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents, which included Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to remove the Malayalam movie "Churuli" from the 'Over The Top Platform' ('OTT) as expeditiously as possible. The Court today dismissed the petition.

The while opining on the issue referred to the trend of interpreting orders of a court of law. The Court specifically referred to its order dated 07.01.2022 which was misinterpreted on social media even though it was published in almost all print and visual media correctly.

"This is how social media forum is misused by a section of society. I am not blaming the entire community who are using social media and most of them are using the social media forum in a useful manner. But a minority is misusing the same," the Court stated. 

The Court further took up lawyers asking how lawyers can make comments on a judgement without reading the judgement. Justice Kunhikrishnan said, 

"The lawyers should show the path to the society about the manner in which a judgment of a court is to be dealt with and how a judgment is to be criticized if it deserves such criticism. They can read the judgment and criticize the judgment if they want and of course not the judges who wrote the judgment. If the lawyers take a stand that they will make comments about a judgment of a court of law only after reading the judgment, that will go a long way because society will accept the stand of lawyers because they are respectable people in the society.

The Court went on, 

"At least hereafter, the lawyers should take an oath that they will make comments in print media, visual media, and social media about a judgment of a court of law only after reading the judgment. As I said earlier, the Bench and bar are two sides of a coin. The lawyers should be the mouthpiece of the judiciary. They should protect the interest of the judiciary. The judges may come and go. But Judiciary should stand. The lawyers are part and parcel of the judiciary. Anyway I leave it to the conscience of all lawyers."

The Court dismissed the petition stating that the petition is without proper prayer and proper pleadings. 

Peggy Fen v. Central Board of Film Certification & Ors.