In the era of social media dominance, where the lines between personal expression and public influence blur, the recent observations of the Supreme Court have underscored a vital issue: the misuse of social platforms in matters of judicial significance. The initiation of contempt proceedings against Assam MLA serves as a poignant reminder of the responsibility that accompanies freedom of speech and expression, particularly in the context of legal proceedings. The judiciary, as the guardian of justice and the upholder of the rule of law, plays a pivotal role in maintaining societal order and ensuring fairness in adjudication. However, this role is increasingly being challenged by the proliferation of misinformation and distortion, facilitated by the unrestricted nature of social media platforms. The case involving MLA Barbhuiya’s misleading Facebook post, falsely claiming a favourable ruling in an election petition, epitomises the dangers posed by such misuse.

The Supreme Court’s assertion that the misuse of social media platforms has the potential to undermine the authority of the courts and interfere with the course of justice is not unfounded. In a democratic society governed by the principles of separation of powers, respect for judicial independence is paramount. Any attempt to manipulate public perception through false narratives not only erodes public trust in the judiciary but also subverts the very foundations of justice. While the right to freedom of speech and expression is sacrosanct, it is not absolute. With rights come responsibilities, and the exercise of these rights must be tempered with prudence and respect for the rule of law. The Supreme Court’s observation that misleading posts on social media can have serious consequences resonates deeply in an age where misinformation spreads like wildfire and perceptions are shaped in the blink of an eye. By holding individuals accountable for their actions, regardless of their stature or position, the judiciary reaffirms its commitment to upholding the integrity of the legal process and ensuring that justice is not only done but is also seen to be done.