• A judge who was a member of the Supreme Court panel criticized Nupur Sharma of the BJP.
• Her remarks regarding Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) made strong statements about personal attacks on judges for their decisions today.
• He stated that personal attacks on judges for their judgments lead to a dangerous environment.

A judge who was a member of the Supreme Court panel that criticized Nupur Sharma of the BJP for her remarks regarding the Prophet Muhammad made strong statements about personal attacks on judges for their decisions today. At a ceremony, Justice JB Pardiwala, a member of the bench that said the former BJP spokesperson needed to apologize to the entire country, remarked: “Personal attacks on judges for their judgments lead to a dangerous environment.”

After making oral remarks against Nupur Sharma during the hearing of her petition, both Justices Pardiwala and Surya Kant came under fire on social media from individuals.

In order to have all First Information Reports filed against her across the nation combined and sent to Delhi, Nupur Sharma has petitioned the Supreme Court.

She also stated in her petition that she and her family have been the target of security threats and that they require protection.

The judges also questioned why Nupur Sharma had not been detained and blamed her for “igniting sentiments across the country” in their findings.

During his speech at a gathering today, Justice Pardiwala stated: “Judges are put in a perilous position where they must consider what the media thinks rather than what the law actually thinks as a result of personal attacks on them for their decisions.“

[embedpost slug=”nupur-sharma-in-big-trouble-indian-supreme-court-big-decision-shan-e-risalat-%ef%b7%ba-main-ghustaki”]

“This undermines the legal system. Instead of providing a constructive critique of the judges’ decisions, social and digital media are typically used to express individualized viewpoints that are more hostile against the judges.”

“This is what undermines the dignity of the judiciary and causes harm to it. Higher courts in the hierarchy, not social media, are where rulings can be appealed. Judges only ever talk with their judgments, never with their tongue.”

“Social media is regularly used in India, which cannot be described as a fully developed or defined democracy, to politicize purely legal and constitutional matters.”

In order to uphold the constitutional guarantee of the rule of law, he continued, social media and digital platforms must be governed nationally.

“In the current setting, digital media trials are an excessive intervention in the administration of justice and cross that Lakshman Rekha numerous times.”

[embedpost slug=”posters-are-pasted-on-gujarat-bridge-demanding-for-nupur-sharmas-arrest”]