In response to the petitioner's representation, the bench conveyed a crucial message regarding the use of social media. The justices emphasized that individuals utilizing social media platforms should be particularly mindful of their impact and far-reaching consequences.
Amid growing concerns over the influence and expansiveness of social media platforms, the Supreme Court has delivered a significant reminder for users to exercise caution and responsibility. This reminder was issued as the court dismissed a petition filed by actor and former Tamil Nadu MLA S Ve Shekher. Shekher is currently facing legal actions for sharing a Facebook post in 2018, alleged to contain derogatory remarks against women journalists.
A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and P K Mishra presided over the case, addressing the plea submitted by Shekher. This plea was directed against the Madras High Court's decision on July 14, which denied his request to quash criminal proceedings linked to the contentious post shared by him.
In response to the petitioner's representation, the bench conveyed a crucial message regarding the use of social media. The justices emphasized that individuals utilizing social media platforms should be particularly mindful of their impact and far-reaching consequences.
The petitioner's counsel argued that, on the day of the incident, Shekher had applied eye medication, impairing his ability to read the post's contents before sharing it.
However, the bench maintained its stance, underscoring the necessity for cautious and judicious engagement with social media. It conveyed that individuals who choose to engage in social media must also be prepared to accept the consequences of their actions.
In light of the evolving digital landscape and its widespread influence, the Supreme Court's reminder serves as a timely cautionary note, encouraging users to navigate social media with prudence and circumspection.
In the ruling issued by the High Court (HC), it was highlighted that Shekher stands accused of "publishing/circulating an abusive, derogatory, and vulgar comment on his Facebook account" dated April 19, 2018. This act prompted a formal complaint filed with the Chennai Commissioner of Police.
The HC also took note of the subsequent developments, which included the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) in response to the complaint. Private complaints were also lodged against him across various regions of Tamil Nadu.
Amid threat from defections, BJP to go into a huddle in Karnataka
During the proceedings at the high court, Shekher's legal counsel contended that he had been unaware of the message's contents, which he purportedly forwarded from his Facebook account. The counsel asserted that upon realizing the derogatory nature of the remarks within the message, Shekher promptly removed the content within hours on the same day. To rectify the situation, he issued an unconditional apology on April 20, 2018, addressed to the women journalists concerned and the media community at large.
The high court's decision noted the submission made by Shekher's counsel regarding his compliance with a directive to submit an affidavit tendering an apology during the course of the legal proceedings.
The court's order further revealed that the forwarded message on April 19, 2018, portrayed women journalists in an unfavorable light. Describing the contents as deeply offensive, the high court refrained from reproducing the message due to its repugnant nature. The message was deemed to be grossly derogatory against the entire press community in Tamil Nadu.
Acknowledging the pervasive influence of social media in today's world, the high court emphasized the swift and extensive reach of messages sent or forwarded on such platforms. The court asserted that we now reside in an era where social media can instantaneously disseminate information to global corners.
Given Shekher's prominence and stature, the high court highlighted the heightened level of responsibility that should accompany his statements or the forwarding of messages. The court stressed that individuals with such influence are expected to uphold a greater level of responsibility in their actions and communications.
'We permit appellant to terminate her pregnancy': Supreme Court allows rape survivor's plea
