Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 1320
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, V. SIVAGNANAM, JJ.
High Court of Madras, Chennai – 600104 - Petitioner
Versus
S. Mahaveer Sivaji - Respondent
Suo Motu Crl. Cont.P.No.1518 Of 2023
Decided On : 13-08-2024
For the Petitioner: Mr. M. Santhanaraman.
For the Respondent: Mr. S. Mahaveer Sivaji, Party-in-Person.
IMPORTANT POINT
Lawyers are expected to uphold the dignity of the court and their profession, and any breach can lead to contempt proceedings, though an unconditional apology may mitigate the consequences.
Headnote:
CONTEMPT - CRIMINAL CONTEMPT - The court addressed a suo motu criminal contempt petition against a respondent for making inappropriate remarks about court proceedings in a letter. The court emphasized the duty of lawyers to maintain decorum and respect towards the court, highlighting that unwarranted actions could lead to contempt proceedings. The respondent's unconditional apology was accepted, leading to the closure of the contempt petition with a warning against future misconduct.
Fact of the Case:
A suo motu criminal contempt petition was filed against the respondent for addressing a letter to the Madras High Court Registry, containing remarks about court proceedings deemed inappropriate.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the remarks made by the respondent to be unnecessary and not in good taste, warranting serious consideration for contempt proceedings. However, the court accepted the respondent's unconditional apology and decided to close the contempt petition.
Issues: Whether the remarks made by the respondent constituted criminal contempt and whether the unconditional apology warranted the closure of the contempt proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that lawyers must maintain decorum and respect towards the court, and any unwarranted actions could lead to contempt. The acceptance of the unconditional apology indicated a lenient approach by the court, provided the respondent refrains from similar conduct in the future.
Result: The contempt petition was closed with no costs, following the acceptance of the respondent's unconditional apology.
ORDER :
(S.M. Subramaniam, J.) :
(Prayer : Suo Motu Criminal Contempt Petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, against the Contemnor herein as per the order of the Court dated 28.04.2023 made in O.S.A.Nos.251 and 258 of 2015.)
The Suo Motu Criminal Contempt Petition has been initiated against the respondent mainly on the ground that he has addressed a letter to the Registry of Madras High Court about certain incidents occurred during the hearing of the case.
2. The letter written by the contemnor is unnecessary and the remarks made by him against the Court proceedings cannot be appreciated. Such remarks ought not to have been made by the respondent, while conducting cases before the Courts.
3. The learned Advocates have duty towards the Courts, to the litigants and to their colleagues. Hence, they are expected to maintain good conduct both inside and outside the Court Hall. Nobility of the profession at all circumstances must be maintained by all concern.
4. Lawyers enjoy a special status in the society by virtue of their profession. They are expected not to take any undue advantage of their position as lawyer in the society or in the Court Hall. Any unwarranted actions and behaviours would undoubtedly result in initiation of such proceedings. While placing arguments, the lawyers are expected maintain decorum and the majesty of Court proceedings.
5. In the present case, the respondent has written a letter, which is undoubtedly not in good taste and such proceedings has been rightly viewed seriously by the Courts for initiation of suo motu criminal contempt proceedings.
6. However, the respondent/contemnor has made an unconditional apology and made an endorsement to the that effect in the case bundle. When the respondent has realised the mistake and made an unconditional apology, this Court decided to accept the same magnanimously with the condition that the respondent shall not involve any such activity in future. Thus, taking a lenient view and accepting the unconditional apology made by the respondent, we are inclined to close the contempt petition.
7. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition stands closed. No costs.
