New Delhi, February 17: The Supreme Court has declined to hear a petition seeking strict guidelines to regulate statements and comments made by constitutional authorities that are deemed inconsistent with constitutional decorum.
The bench, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, acknowledged the seriousness of the issue raised but noted that the petition appears to target specific individuals. The court emphasized that it cannot entertain petitions that seem to be directed against a particular person or political party.
The petition referenced statements made by several leaders, including Himanta Biswa Sarma, Pushkar Singh Dhami, Yogi Adityanath, and Nitesh Rane. The petitioners claimed to have identified around 30 objectionable public statements during their research.
During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the petitioners, argued for immediate judicial intervention, stating that the situation is becoming increasingly severe and that the court should take concrete steps. He clarified that the petition is not aimed at targeting any individual.
However, the bench remarked that the petition selectively mentions certain individuals while ignoring others, which is inappropriate. The court suggested that the petitioners withdraw the current petition and file a new one focused solely on constitutional principles, ensuring it does not appear to target any specific individual or party.
Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Joymalya Bagchi were also part of the bench. The court stressed that political parties and leaders have a responsibility to promote brotherhood in the country and uphold constitutional values. Additionally, the court expressed concern over whether guidelines, if established, would be effectively followed.
During the proceedings, the court posed the question, “How can we control thoughts before they are expressed?” In response, Sibal stated that while thoughts cannot be controlled, actions based on those thoughts and their consequences can be regulated. He cited the ‘Vishaka Guidelines’ as an example, which were in place before laws against sexual harassment in the workplace were enacted.
Sibal also mentioned that speeches made before the enforcement of the model code of conduct often circulate on social media and other platforms even after the announcement of elections. This complicates enforcement actions by the Election Commission, as these statements are made prior to the formal declaration of elections. He urged the Supreme Court to consider formulating guidelines for media and online platforms in such situations.
Chief Justice Chandrachud acknowledged the petitioners’ standing and the gravity of the issue raised. He expressed a desire for the court to consider the petition but insisted that the matter be presented without bias and in a fair manner. He also noted that the current petition is not well-prepared.
The Supreme Court has postponed the hearing for two weeks to allow for the submission of a revised petition. Sibal assured the court that the new petition would not name any specific individual and would apply equally to all political parties.
My name is Ganpat Singh Choughan. I am an experienced content writer with 7 years of expertise in the field. Currently, I contribute to Daily Kiran, creating engaging and informative content across a variety of categories including technology, health, travel, education, and automobiles. My goal is to deliver accurate, insightful, and captivating information through my words to help readers stay informed and empowered.
Leave a Comment