In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India clarified that uncomfortable questions posed during court proceedings are an essential part of the judicial process and cannot be considered public humiliation. The Court emphasized that such questions are necessary for ascertaining the truth and ensuring justice.
Background of the Case
The case involved a petitioner who had challenged certain statements and uncomfortable questions raised during writ proceedings in the Rajasthan High Court. Petitioner No.1 had returned home, leading to the dismissal of a habeas corpus petition filed for her presence.
During the proceedings, the police made statements suggesting that Petitioner No.1 had divorced her husband and remarried. Upon learning of these statements, she approached the High Court, seeking clarification on their accuracy. Initially, the High Court allowed the request, but later dismissed the petition, stating that there was no further issue to adjudicate.
Read Also:- Imprisonment of Judgment Debtor: Supreme Court's Observations on Wilful Disobedience of Decrees
Despite filing multiple applications for review and clarification, all were dismissed. The petitioner then approached the Supreme Court, alleging that the statements made by the police in open court amounted to public humiliation and defamation.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, rejected the petition, stating:
“During court proceedings, many statements are made and questions are posed which may make a person uncomfortable, but all such statements or questions cannot be misconstrued as humiliating a person. After all, it is the duty of the Court to reach the truth of the matter, and such an exercise may demand putting forward certain questions and suggestions which may be uncomfortable to some.”
The Court highlighted that judicial proceedings are meant to uncover facts, and certain questions may be necessary to achieve this objective. Merely feeling uncomfortable with a statement does not equate to defamation or humiliation.
Finding no merit in the petition, the Supreme Court ruled that the grievance of defamation and humiliation was "totally misconceived." It reiterated that questioning and statements in the courtroom are part of the judicial process and cannot be labeled as public humiliation.
"Uncomfortable questions are an inevitable part of the judicial process, and without them, the court would be unable to perform its duty of truth-finding," the bench remarked.
Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.
Case Title: Smt. Dhanlaxmi @ Sunita Mathuria & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
