Justice Pardiwala who heard Nupur Sharma plea slams "personal attacks" on judges
New Delhi, July 3: Supreme Court Judge Justice JB Pardiwala, who was part of a vacation bench that criticised suspended BJP leader Nupur Sharma over her Prophet remarks, on Sunday slammed "personal attacks" made on judges for their judgments.
"Personal attacks on judges for their judgments lead to a dangerous scenario where the judges have to think about what media thinks instead of what the law really thinks. This harms the rule of law. Social and digital media is primarily resorted to expressing personalised opinions more against the judges, rather than a constructive critical appraisal of their judgments.
This is what is harming the judicial institution and lowering its dignity. The remedy of judgments does not lie with social media but with higher courts in the hierarchy. Judges never speak through their tongue, only through their judgments. In India, which cannot be defined as a completely mature or defined democracy, social media is employed frequently to politicize purely legal and constitutional issues," NDTV quoted him as saying at an event.
His comments come after Justice Pardiwala and Justice Surya Kant came under attack on social media sites for their remarks against BJP leader Nupur Sharma.
Sharma, who was in the centre of a storm following her controversial comments on Prophet during a TV debate, had approached the Supreme Court for clubbing of FIRs lodged in various states against her for the remark.
He added that digital and social media needs to be regulated throughout the country to preserve the rule of law under the constitution. "In the modern-day context, trials by digital media are an undue interference in process of justice dispensation and cross that the Lakshman Rekha many-a-times," he said.
The apex court, during the hearing, said, "She has a threat or she has become a security threat?" "The way she has ignited emotions across the country. This lady is single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country," the bench said.
"We saw the debate on how she was incited. But the way she said all this and later says she was a lawyer with ten years standing? It is shameful. She should apologise to the whole country," the apex court said.