Can't call any part of India as Pakistan: Supreme Court objects to remark by Justice V Srishananda

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took strong exception to the controversial statement made by Karnataka High Court judge Justice V Srishananda, who referred to a particular locality in Bengaluru as 'Pakistan' [IN RE: Remarks by High Court judge during Court Proceedings].

A five-judge Bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant and Hrishikesh Roy issued a strong note of caution for judges and lawyers, saying that they should take care to ensure that their personal biases are not reflected while discharging their duties.

"We can't call any part of the territory of India as Pakistan because that fundamentally is contrary to the territorial integrity of the nation," the Bench said.

Nevertheless, the Bench closed the suo motu proceedings initiated by it in relation to the matter after taking note of the fact that the High Court judge had apologised for his statements.

However, the apex court did not hold back from voicing its concerns over such statements.

"This casual observation may indicate personal biases, especially when perceived to be directed at a certain gender or community. Thus one must be wary of making patriarchal or misogynistic comments. We express our serious concern about observations on a certain gender or a community and such observations are liable to be construed in a negative light. We hope and trust that responsibilities entrusted on all stakeholders are discharged without bias and caution," the top court said.

In the era of social media, any observations by judges can have a wide impact, and thus, judges should be aware of their predispositions so that they can deliver justice impartially, the Court said.

"The prevalence and reach of social media has included wide reporting of court proceedings. Most High Courts in the country have now adopted rules of live-streaming or conduct of video conferencing which emerged as a need during the COVID-19 pandemic and it became an important outreach facility for courts to mete out access to justice. All parties, judges, lawyers, litigants must be aware that proceedings reach audiences who are well beyond the physical precincts of the court and thus all must be aware of the wider impact of observations on community at large. As judges we are conscious of the fact that each individual has a set of predispositions based on early or later experiences of life. It is important that a judge is aware of their own predispositions, and the heart and soul of a judge is when they are impartial and only then we can deliver objective justice."

It is important for all stakeholders to understand that the only values which must guide judicial decision-making are the ones in the Constitution, the Bench underscored.

Two videos of Justice Srishananda had gone viral on social media.

In one video, he was seen referring to a Muslim dominated sub-locality in West Bengaluru as 'Pakistan'.

In another video, he was seen reprimanding a woman lawyer for answering a question put to the counsel for the opposite party.

The judge was seen telling the woman lawyer in jest that she seems to know a lot about the opposite party, and that she might even reveal the colour of his undergarments next.

The Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognisance of the controversial comments made by the judge and had sought a report from the Karnataka High Court Registrar General on the same

After the top court took cognisance of the same, the judge apologised.

When the case was heard today, Attorney General R Venkataramani requested that the matter could be taken by an in house procedure.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that the matter "may not be stretched" considering the fact that the judge has apologised.

The Court eventually proceeded to close the case after making strong observations on how judges should conduct themselves.