Andhra Pradesh HC slaps contempt case on 49 netizens

NEW DELHI: Exasperated by a scurrilous smear campaign against it for ruling against government decisions, the Andhra Pradesh high court has taken the unprecedented decision of initiating contempt of court proceedings against 49 social media users, including supporters of YSR Congress Party, which governs the state.

Never before has a constitutional court drawn up contempt proceedings against so many people, and that too on the basis of their remarks, howsoever scurrilous or damaging, on social media. But the tipping point came when the HC found that judges who ruled against certain proposals of the Jagan Mohan Reddy government were berated on social media as former CM Chandrababu Naidu’s men.

Between May 22 and May 24, the HC received several mails and found several posts on social media with videos attributing “motives, caste bias and corruption allegations” against judges of the Supreme Court and the high court for their orders on several PILs. The posts contained “abusive, life threatening and intimidating words against the judges”.

“There is also fabrication of material with abusive, hatred and contemptuous content to cause incitement, disaffection and ill will against the HC and its judges,” the court said and referred to a video of a speech of YSRCP member Nandigama Suresh saying that (former CM) Naidu was managing the HC.

Referring to other abusive and life-threatening posts, the HC said the identical and intimidating posts were meant to scandalise the court and lower the image of the HC and its judges in the public eye. After going through the mails and social media posts, the advocate general told the HC that they were “wholly unwarranted and are an attempt to scandalise the institution”. He conveyed his consent in writing for commencement of contempt proceedings.

The high court issued contempt notice to the social media users who were identified from their accounts and asked the state government to identify eight unidentified users, such as one ‘devil’s attorney’, before posting further proceedings after three weeks.

The HC believes it was targeted after it quashed the state’s proposal to introduce English as mandatory medium of instruction in government schools, which led to a fusillade of derogatory social media posts against the judge who was part of the bench that decided against the proposal. The activity increased after the HC restrained the state from painting government buildings in the colours of the governing party’s flag.

Of late, judges, be it in the Supreme Court, HCs or even trial courts, are increasingly subjected to derogatory remarks by a group of social media users whenever they feel court decisions are not in sync with their professed stand.

Never before has a constitutional court drawn up contempt proceedings against so many people, and that too on the basis of their remarks, howsoever scurrilous or damaging, on social media.

Never before has a constitutional court drawn up contempt proceedings against so many people and that too, on the basis of their remarks, howsoever scurrilous or damaging, on social media