Launching Communal Campaign Against Judges On Social Media Would Weaken System Itself, Time To Regulate It: Madras High Court

The bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar was taking up the case in which the bench had summoned Advocate S Vanchinathan to explain if he stood by his statement that one of the judges of the bench (Justice Swaminathan) was exhibiting caste and communal bias. The matter has now been placed before the Chief Justice for further orders.

The bench, in its order, said that when a judge sits on the dias, he discharges his judicial duties as per his conscience and by adhering to the judicial oath. The bench added that while discharging the judicial function, a judge cannot be said to carry his caste and communal bias, and any person continuing to have such perception has jaundiced eyes. The court added that there were remedies provided under the legal system if a person was aggrieved and without doing so, some people have launched social media campaigns against the judges.

“When a Judge sits on the dias, he discharges his judicial duties as per his conscience and by strictly adhering to the judicial oath. He cannot be seen as carrying on his caste or religious labels while on the bench. If someone continues to have such a perception, he obviously has jaundiced eyes. The legal system provides for remedies and recourse has to be taken to them by persons aggrieved by individual decisions. Without doing so, launching communal campaigns on the social media would eventually weaken the system itself. Time has come to regulate the level of discourse in the social media,” the court said.

The court also said that such acts of contempt cannot be condemned in the name of freedom of speech and expression, and lawyers who make such statements are guilty of professional misconduct. The court also observed that the Lakshman Rekha should not be crossed and if crossed, it would invite peril.

“In the name of freedom of speech and expression, one cannot condone acts of contempt. The channels which rake in monies by such slanderous campaigns will have to be taken head on. Lawyers who make such statements are guilty of professional misconduct. There is something called laxman rekha which if crossed must invite peril,” the court said.

The court had also remarked that it was unfortunate that some retired judges of the High Court were passing reckless comments about the case when the bench was already seized of the matter.

On July 24, the bench had summoned Vanchinathan for alleging communal and caste bias by Justice Swaminathan. The bench had directed Vanchinathan to appear before it personally.

When the matter was taken up, the bench asked Vanchinathan if he still stood by the allegations. To this, Vanchinathan asked the bench to give in writing the charges against him, which he would then reply.

The court made it clear that it had not initiated any contempt proceeding against Vanchinathan and that it only wanted to comply with the principles of natural justice before making a reference to the Chief Justice. The court also added that it intended to close the matter if Vanchinathan had a change of heart. However, since Vanchinathan refused to reply to the court's queries, the bench noted that he did not have any such intention. The court added that an activist should have stood by his statements and must be ready to face the consequences that follow.

The court has now directed the registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice and said that it was for the Chief Justice to take any action that he deems fit and appropriate.

Case Title: Dr. D Vetrichelvan v The Tamil University and Others

Case No: WA (MD) No. 510 of 2023