Murder metaphor by Madras High Court inappropriate; judges should be cautious when making off-the-cuff remarks in open court: Supreme Court

The oral remarks made by Madras High Court against the Election Commission of India on April 26 attributing the COVID-19 situation in the country to the poll body, were inappropriate and harsh, the Supreme Court said on Thursday (The Chief Election Commissioner of India v. MR Vijayabhaskar)..Judges should exercise caution while making off-the-cuff remarks in open court, which may be susceptible to misinterpretation, the top court added..The Madras High Court had said on April 26 that the ECI was singularly responsible for the COVID-19 situation in India and that it should probably be put on murder charges for failing to ensure compliance of COVID-19 protocol during election rallies..“The remarks of the High Court were harsh. The metaphor inappropriate,” the Supreme Court said..However, the top court said that even if the High Court did indeed make the oral observations which have been alluded to, it did not seek to attribute culpability for the COVID-19 pandemic in the country to the EC.What instead it would have intended to do was to urge the EC to ensure stricter compliance of COVID-19 related protocols during elections, the Court observed..The remarks of the (Madras) High Court were harsh. The metaphor inappropriate.Supreme Court .“Having said that, we must emphasize the need for judges to exercise caution in off-the-cuff remarks in open court, which may be susceptible to misinterpretation. Language, both on the Bench and in judgments, must comport with judicial propriety,” the judgment underscored..The observations came in the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court on an appeal filed by the Election Commission of India (ECI) against the observations made by the Madras High Court. The High Court had made the controversial remark while hearing a petition by AIADMK's R Vijayabhaskar raising concerns over whether adequate facilities are in place to ensure COVID-19 protocol during vote counting at the Karur constituency. During the hearing of the case on April 26, Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee of Madras High Court had remarked,“You are the only institution that is responsible for the situation today. No action against political parties taking rallies despite every order of the Court. Your Election Commission should be put up on murder charges probably!”The ECI had first approached the High Court taking objection to the said remark.In its plea before Madras High Court, the poll body had sought directions to be issued to media houses to confine their reports to observations recorded in orders or judgments and to refrain from reporting on oral observations made during court proceedings in the case.However, the High Court declined to entertain the plea, prompting the appeal before the Supreme Court..[ECI case] Internet has revolutionised court reporting; real-time court updates part of press freedom: 5 highlights from Supreme Court judgment.The Supreme Court in its judgment on Wednesday refused to pass any order in favour of ECI to gag the media stating that freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) covers the freedom to cover court proceedings. The apex court, however, took a favourable view of ECI's position that the language employed by the High Court while hearing the case was unduly harsh. .The Supreme Court also explained the significance of language in judicial process.“Language is an important instrument of a judicial process which is sensitive to constitutional values. Judicial language is a window to a conscience sensitive to constitutional ethos. Bereft of its understated balance, language risks losing its symbolism as a protector of human dignity,” the judgment stated. Further, the Court highlighted the significance of High Courts in the Constitutionals scheme which it said, in turn, casts great responsibility on the High Courts..“The power of judicial review is entrusted to the High Courts under the Constitution. So high is its pedestal that it constitutes a part of the basic features of the Constitution. Yet responsibility bears a direct co-relationship with the nature and dimensions of the entrustment of power,” the judgment said..Therefore, a degree of caution and circumspection by the High Court would have allayed a grievance of the nature that has been urged in the present case, the apex court opined.The Court concluded its judgment by highlighting the ECI’s admirable track record in ensuring sanctity of electoral democracy.“The EC has a track record of being an independent constitutional body which shoulders a significant burden in ensuring the sanctity of electoral democracy,” the judgment said..We hope the matter can rest with a sense of balance which we have attempted to bring, the Court added..[Read Judgment]