HC initiates contempt action against 2 advocates, litigants

Image
Press Trust of India Chennai
Last Updated : Aug 14 2015 | 8:13 PM IST
The Madras High Court today initiated criminal contempt proceedings against two advocates and two litigants who made a sitting Judge, Advocate General, Public Prosecutor, besides officials of the Registry as respondents in four criminal original petitions.
Dismissing the petitions, Justice P.N.Prakash took suo motu cognizance under Contempt of Courts Act against advocates Manikandan Vathan Chettiar and Kalyani, Panimalar and Aarthy Shankar (litigants) who filed the petitions seeking action against the judge besides naming him as respondent along with the others.
The judge directed the Registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice so as to enable him to post the criminal contempt before an appropriate division bench in terms of Section 18 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Reckless and unsubstantiated allegations were made against the learned judge, thereby scandalising and lowering the authority of the court, besides making him a party to these petitions, the judge said.
Justice P.N.Prakash, referring to Supreme Court orders, in his order said "it is unthinkable as to how an advocate of this Court or any other litigant can implead a sitting judge of this court in proceedings of this nature and make all sorts of allegations about his judicial conduct and also invite findings on the same."
"....In the light of the mechanism for taking action against a sitting judge of the High Court having been put in place, there is no question of any public discussion on the conduct of the judge of the High Court," Justice Prakash said.
"Therefore, all the petitions listed are clearly not maintainable and are liable to be dismissed. However the matter do not end therein."
"This Court finds that the conduct of the counsel as well as the parties who have filed the petitions cannot be let off. This court intends to take suo motu criminal contempt action against the counsel and the parties," the judge said, holding that there was prima facie material against the two advocates and litigants for initiating contempt action.
The advocates have thrown to wind fundamental canons of decent behaviour towards colleagues "by impleading them as party respondents and character-assassinating them knowing full well that they would not stoop low and retaliate. Therefore, both of them are liable to be proceeded against for professional misconduct before the Tamil Nadu Bar Council.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Aug 14 2015 | 8:13 PM IST

Next Story