AP High Court concerned over objectionable content on social media against judiciary
The court suggested that its registrar general give URL IDs of objectionable videos and posts to social media agencies for removal
VIJAYAWADA: Andhra Pradesh High Court has expressed concern over inordinate delay in removal of derogatory remarks posted on social media platforms against judges and judiciary.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice K. Lalitha heard a petition in this regard on Friday. The court questioned the CBI superintendent of police as to why the bureau has failed in arresting Punch Prabhakar, who has been posting objectionable content on social media against judges and the judiciary. The court also asked why CBI has failed in getting objectionable content removed from social media platforms.
The court suggested that its registrar general give URL IDs of objectionable videos and posts to social media agencies for removal of such content within 36 hours. It directed both CBI and social media agencies to do so.
High Court registrar general’s counsel N. Aswani Kumar submitted that Punch Prabhakar, staying in the US, has uploaded a fresh video on social media with objectionable content undermining the judiciary. The counsel stated that Prabhakar is being supported by a section of political leaders. Aswani Kumar said CBI must find out where exactly Punch Prabhakar is staying.
Counsels for social media agencies Kapil Sibal and Sajan Poovayya submitted that if URL IDs are shared, removal of objectionable comments from social media platforms could be possible within 36 hours.
Meanwhile, CBI’s counsel Subash submitted that they have written to Facebook that it remove videos with objectionable content against judiciary. 32 URL IDs had also been shared in this regard on December 5, 2020. A similar letter was written to Google in January 2021. But the objectionable content has not yet been removed.
The CBI’s counsel said that they are not getting support from social media agencies. He submitted that if details of accused are not given, it will be difficult for CBI to nab the culprits.
The court took this seriously and asked the counsel why CBI had failed in bringing the matter to court’s notice. The court directed that the CBI director file an affidavit on the issue.
The CBI counsel submitted that if social media agencies gave details, they would be able to expedite the probe.