Madras HC Sentences Man in Contempt Case for Making Scandalous Allegations Against Sitting Judges of SC & HC
The Madras High Court has ordered the maximum sentence in a contempt case against a man for making scandalous allegations against the sitting judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court.
The Bench sentenced the contemnor to six months of simple imprisonment for committing criminal contempt in the “face of the court.” The bench imposed the maximum sentence contemplated under Section 12 of the Contempts of Court Act, 1971 (the Act) for making scandalous and reckless allegations against multiple judges in various Courts in India, including the Supreme Court and the Madras High Court.
A Division Bench of Justice M.S. Ramesh and Justice Sunder Mohan observed, “We are of the affirmed view that such a behaviour is not only contemptuous against us, but also to the entire justice delivery system. Since the contemnor has not shown any remorse, but rather was challenging us to pass any order of our choice, we hold that the letters of the contemnor dated 17.04.2024 and 22.04.2024 scandalizes, prejudices and has interfered with the due course of our judicial proceedings, apart from obstructing the administration of justice. Hence, we hold the contemnor guilty of having committed criminal contempt, as defined under Section 2(c) of the Contempts of Court Act, 1971.”
The Court earlier in April had initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against the contemnor following the scandalous allegations posted on his social media account. The allegations targeted a sitting Judge of the Supreme Court and three sitting Judges of the High Court, which the Bench noted were designed to "scandalize and prejudice" the Judiciary.
"The contemnor is facing suo motu contempt proceedings in Suo Motu Contempt Petition No.142 of 2020, pursuant to the administrative orders passed by the then portfolio judges of Thiruallur District," the order stated. This earlier case stemmed from the contemnor’s Facebook posts containing defamatory statements about the Indian Judiciary.
The contemnor had written an eight paged letter to the Chief Justice of India making unsavoury remarks and scandalous allegations against High Court Judges in which the pictures of three sitting Judges of the Madras High Court and a picture of a sitting Judge of the Hon'ble Supreme Court were attached. The Letter equated the judged with “head hair,” “dogs,” and “rowdies.”
When questioned by the Bench, the contemnor not only affirmed the contents of his scandalous letter but also challenged the judges to take contempt action against him. This led the Court to conclude that the contemnor’s behaviour "tends to interfere in the administration of justice" and amounted to criminal contempt.
Referring to the 2020 judgment of the Supreme Court in National Lawyers' Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms v. Union of India, the Bench addressed the necessity of stern action against such contemptuous behaviour to uphold the majesty of the Court.
Despite being given multiple opportunities to explain himself, the contemnor continued labelling the judges as "criminals." The Court imposed the maximum sentence under the Act and stated that the contemnor’s actions "scandalizes this Court, prejudices and interferes with the due course of the judicial proceeding, apart from obstructing the administration of justice."
Accordingly, the High Court closed the suo moto contempt petition.
Cause Title: X v. PU. Venkatesan
