SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 2054

K.T.THOMAS, R.P.SETHI
In Re – Appellant
Versus
S. K. Sundaram – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Thomas, J.-"The contempt of court jurisdiction is not exercised to protect the dignity of an individual judge, but to protect the administration of justice from being maligned." While dealing with this contempt proceedings we remind ourselves of the said observation made by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India & Anr.1

2. One S.K. Sundaram, Advocate (hereinafter referred to as the contemner) sent a telegraphic communication to Dr. Justice A.S. Anand, the Hon ble Chief Justice of India on 3.11.2000. As the present proceedings are founded on the wordings of that communication we feel it necessary to extract the material portion thereof. It reads thus :

"I call upon Shriman Dr. A.S. Anand Hon ble Chief Justice of India to step down from the Constitutional office of Chief Justice of India forthwith, failing which I will be constrained to move the criminal court for offences under Sections 420, 406, 471 Indian Penal Code for falsification of your age, without prejudice to the right to file a writ of quo-warranto against you and for a direction to deposit a sum of Rs. 3 crores for usurping to the office of Chief Justice of India ev





























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top