The Kerala Judicial Officers' Association (KJOA) has formally approached the High Court, seeking urgent intervention against what it terms a "calculated attempt" to erode public confidence in the judiciary. The move comes in the wake of severe cyber attacks targeting Principal District and Sessions Judge Honey M. Varghese following her verdict in the 2017 actress assault case.

The Core Allegation

The KJOA letter cites "wild, defamatory, and scandalous imputations" circulated on Facebook and YouTube, including baseless claims that the judgment was "prepared in consultation with the accused."

In a strongly worded letter, the association described the social media backlash as an "unprecedented incident of public scandalisation." While criticism of judgments is a democratic right, the KJOA argues that recent actions have crossed the line into personal vilification of the judge herself.

Beyond Criticism: A Personal Attack?

The controversy stems from the recent judgment involving actor Dileep and prime accused Pulsar Suni. The KJOA notes that the attacks name specific practicing lawyers, film personalities, and media houses.

"A Judge can act only on the evidence placed before the court and cannot deliver a verdict in accordance with baseless media narratives."

The letter emphasizes a critical vulnerability of the judiciary: judges cannot publicly defend themselves. They speak solely through their judgments. When narratives—often "distorted versions"—spread unchecked online, the institution itself suffers damage.

The Demands

  • Initiate Criminal Contempt proceedings under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
  • Direct social media platforms to remove malicious content immediately.
  • Restrain platforms from hosting future materials that scandalize the judiciary.

"We cannot remain silent spectators to such orchestrated actions," the association declared, signaling a potential turning point in how the judiciary responds to the age of digital trial by media.