Judges do not have any general immunity from
criticism of their judicial conduct, provided that it is made in good
faith and is genuine criticism, and not any attempt to impair the
administration of justice. In
In re Arundhati Roy ((2002) 3 SCC 343), the Supreme Court of India followed the view taken in the American Supreme Court (Frankfurter, J.) in
Pennekamp v. Florida
(328 US 331 : 90 L Ed 1295 (1946)) in which the United States Supreme
Court observed: “If men, including judges and journalists, were angels,
there would be no problem of contempt of court. Angelic judges would be
undisturbed by extraneous influences and angelic journalists would not
seek to influence them. The power to punish for contempt, as a means of
safeguarding judges in deciding on behalf of the community as
impartially as is given to the lot of men to decide, is not a privilege
accorded to judges. The power to punish for contempt of court is a
safeguard not for judges as persons but for the function which they
exercise”.
No comments:
Post a Comment