Supreme Court Mandate: Judicial Oversight Required for Social Media Prosecutions, Ending Systemic Harassment

In a landmark ruling reinforcing constitutional safeguards, the Supreme Court has upheld a High Court directive that effectively curtails the arbitrary use of criminal law against individuals for critical social media commentary. This judicial intervention addresses a systemic pattern of harassment, where multiple, often frivolous, cases were weaponized against citizens expressing dissent toward governmental or ruling party authorities. The Court's order establishes stringent procedural prerequisites for law enforcement, mandating that police must first verify the legal standing of a complainant as a 'person aggrieved' under relevant statutes before initiating any formal action. Furthermore, authorities are now compelled to conduct a preliminary inquiry to assess the substantive merits of a grievance prior to registering a First Information Report (FIR). This analytical framework shifts the burden from reactive prosecution to proactive verification, protecting fundamental rights to free expression and due process. The ruling represents a significant recalibration of state power, embedding judicial oversight into the digital public sphere and setting a precedent against the mechanical criminalization of political speech online.