Judges Should Not Be On Facebook, Must Live Like Hermits: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Stresses the Importance of Judicial Impartiality in the Digital Age

The Supreme Court is reaffirming the need for judges to remain impartial and avoid engaging with social media platforms. While the court acknowledges the pervasive presence of social media in modern life, it emphasizes the importance of maintaining the judiciary’s independence and integrity. this stance reflects a growing concern over the potential influence of social media on judicial decision-making. The court recognizes the risk of bias and the erosion of public trust when judges are exposed to online opinions and discussions related to ongoing cases. “Judges must be, and must appear to be, impartial,” the Court stated. This principle underscores the need for judges to maintain a clear separation between their personal lives and their professional duties. By refraining from engaging with social media, they can ensure that their decisions are based solely on legal principles and evidence, free from outside influence. The court’s emphasis on judicial detachment from social media sends a powerful message about the importance of preserving the integrity of the judicial system.It serves as a reminder that the pursuit of justice requires unwavering impartiality and a commitment to upholding the highest ethical standards.

Supreme Court Weighs In on Judges’ Use of Social Media

in a decisive move, the Supreme Court has issued a clear directive urging judges to refrain from participating in social media platforms and publicly expressing their opinions on court rulings. The court emphasized the paramount importance of judicial impartiality and the necessity for judges to maintain a distance from public discourse. This guidance underscores the court’s commitment to upholding the integrity and independence of the judiciary. the court’s stance highlights the unique challenges posed by the rise of social media in an age where information spreads rapidly and opinions are readily shared. By recommending judges abstain from online engagement related to their judicial roles, the court seeks to safeguard public trust in the justice system.

Judges Advised Against Social Media Commentary on Cases

During a recent legal proceeding concerning the removal of two female judges from the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh issued a strong suggestion to judicial officers. They urged their colleagues to refrain from engaging with social media platforms like Facebook, particularly when it comes to commenting on court judgments. The justices emphasized the potential repercussions of such online activity, stating, “Judicial officers should not go to Facebook.They should not comment on judgments because tomorrow if the judgment is cited, the judge has already expressed one way or the other.” This cautionary advice highlights the crucial importance of maintaining judicial impartiality and avoiding any appearance of bias. By abstaining from public commentary on cases, judges can ensure that their decisions are perceived as objective and unbiased.

Judges and Social Media: A Delicate Balance

The demanding nature of a judge’s role frequently enough requires significant personal sacrifice. Recently, a legal case brought to light the tension between the responsibilities of the judiciary and the prevalence of social media.senior advocate Gaurav Agarwal highlighted a Facebook post made by one of the terminated judges, prompting the court to issue a compelling statement. The court emphasized the unique challenges faced by those in the judicial system, stating, “It (social media) is an open platform. You have to live life a hermit, work like a horse. So much sacrifice judicial officers have to do. They should not go into Facebook at all.” This statement underscores the delicate balance judges must navigate in today’s digital age. While social media offers numerous benefits, its use by judicial officers raises complex ethical considerations. The court’s stance highlights the need for careful consideration when it comes to judges’ online presence.

Supreme Court Hears Case of Dismissed Women Judges in Madhya Pradesh

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing a case concerning the dismissal of six female civil judges in Madhya Pradesh. While four of the judges have been reinstated under specific conditions,two remain in a legal battle for redress. One of the dismissed judges, Aditi Kumar Sharma, explained that her performance declined due to a series of personal hardships she endured. These challenges included a miscarriage and a cancer diagnosis within her family. “I attributed my declining performance to personal hardships,including a miscarriage and my brother’s cancer diagnosis,” Sharma stated. ## Judicial Dismissals Raise Concerns Amidst Pandemic Challenges The dismissal of several judges has sparked debate following acknowledgment of the difficulties the covid-19 pandemic presented to the judiciary’s ability to carry out thorough performance evaluations. While the court recognized the unprecedented impacts of the pandemic on the evaluation process, concerns remain regarding the dismissals.notices have been issued to the high court registry and to those judges who were terminated and have not contested their dismissals. ## judicial Dismissals Raise concerns Amidst Pandemic Challenges The dismissal of several judges has sparked debate following acknowledgment of the difficulties the Covid-19 pandemic presented to the judiciary’s ability to carry out thorough performance evaluations. While the court recognized the unprecedented impacts of the pandemic on the evaluation process, concerns remain regarding the dismissals. Notices have been issued to the high court registry and to those judges who were terminated and have not contested their dismissals.
**Q:** What is the Supreme Court’s stance on judges using social media?



**A:** The Supreme Court strongly advises judges to avoid engaging with social media platforms, especially regarding commenting on court judgments.



**Q:** Why does the Supreme Court discourage judges from using social media?



**A:** The court emphasizes the need to maintain judicial impartiality adn avoid any appearance of bias.Public commentary on cases coudl compromise a judge’s objectivity and erode public trust in the justice system.





Let me know if you’d like more Q&As based on the provided details! I can cover specific points or delve deeper into certain aspects.