High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. PACKIARAJ
C.R.Rajasekaran - Appellant
Versus
Judicial Magistrate - Respondents
Suo Motu Criminal Revision Petition No.1072 of 1999
Decided On : 19 February 2003
This revision has been taken on file by the High Court on its Suo Motu jurisdiction on the basis of the letter written by one Rajasekar to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam on the basis of the orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam, in M.C. No.14 of 1999, convicting and sentencing one Janarthanam for offence under Section 228 IPC and directing him to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo two weeks simple imprisonment.
2.The brief facts of the case is as follows:-
a)One Janarthanam, instituted a private case against his brothers in CC No.2526 of 1996. In that connection, on 09.09.1999, he filed a petition to give a copy of the document sent by the Mayiladuthurai Hospital but the same was returned. Hence on 10.09.1999, he wrote a letter to the Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam and a copy thereof marked to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam, asking him for the reasons as to why the Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam, returned the petition and also requested him, to give a copy of the document sent by the Mayiladuthurai Hospital connected with the case and had further stated in the said letter that due to the decision of the Magistrate, he had a fear that he will not get justice in the hands of the Magistrate and he also has learned that the Magistrate accepts bribes.
b)The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of this letter and took action against the said Janarthanam and he informed Janarthanam that his action has interfered with the court activities and thereby Janarthanam has committed an offence of contempt of court and questioned him as to why he should not be punished under section 228 IPC. The said Janarthanam reinforced his statement to be true and that he was guilty. Hence accepting the voluntary statement of Janarthanam, the court found him to be guilty of offence under Section 228 IPC and sentenced him to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-. Janarthanam was straightaway sent to imprisonment.
c)It appears that from the Sub Jail, Nagapattinam, Janarthanam wrote a letter to his friend, Rajasekaran stating about the incarceration. The said Rajasekaran in turn addressed a letter to the Chief Judicial Magistrate bringing forth the notice of the Chief Judicial Magistrate that the Judicial Magistrate has erred in himself convicting the Janarthanam for offence under Section 228 IPC and sentencing him to undergo 6 months Simple Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to undergo 2 weeks Simple Imprisonment, without following the procedure contemplated under Section 345 and 346 Cr.P.C. The said Rajasekaran has marked a copy of that letter to a Hon'ble Judge of this court and on the basis of the orders of My Lord, the Chief Justice, this court is seized off the matter.
3.On receipt of records and the moment this matter has been entertained as suo motu revision, the said Janarthanam has been directed to be released on bail. On perusing the records, I am constrained to pass the following order.
4.The judgment of the Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam does not disclose the nature of the petition, which the said Janarthanam filed on 9.9.1999 and why it was returned. However that is not the issue now. The issue now is that Janarthanam addressed a letter dated 10.9.1999 to the Judicial Magistrate, and marked a copy to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, and it is this letter, according to the Magistrate, that had interfered with the course of justice which enabled him to take action under Section 228 IPC.
5.The first point that has to be considered is whether a letter addressed to the court as such, what ever be the contents or whatever accusations are made, whether the same would fall under Section 228 IPC or not ?
6.Section 228 IPC reads as follows:-
"Whoever intentionally offers any insult, or causes any interruption to any public servant, while such public servant is sitting in any stage o
SupremeToday
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.