Oral remarks are bound to be made when there is an oral hearing, opined Justice Gupta.
“When a judge hears a case, he hasn’t made up his mind as yet, he hears both parties and decides order. During the course of hearing, he can put very uncomfortable questions to both sides. So, there is nothing wrong in making oral remarks, these are oral observations,” he added.
Finding nothing wrong with judges making such observations, he said,
“I see no reason as Supreme Court has held that these oral remarks as right of free speech, they can be recorded. But then every oral observation can’t form part of the order…I know this is more in the context of the Nupur Sharma case but so what? That is what the judges strongly felt and they said it. There is nothing wrong.”
According to Justice Deepak, people don’t understand how hearings take place, and unfortunately, they think that one remark amounts to the final decision. However, tomorrow, the same judge may change his remark after hearing the other side, he pointed out.
On the criticism these remarks evoke on social media, he said,
“I don’t have a problem with reporting, because it is part of the right to free speech. Only thing is judges, now knowing everything is going to be reported, should be a little careful about making remarks in general.”
Explaining the mindset of a judge who makes such remarks during a hearing, he said,
“You see as a judge, when hearing a legal point, you sometimes have to play devil’s advocate, make certain remarks to know the real argument in the case. It’s just that we don’t understand hearing system and we think because the judge has said this, then he must be deciding like this.”
Source: Barandbench
