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.
