Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, M.JOTHIRAMAN
High Court of Madras – Appellant
Versus
T.Ashok Surana, S/o. Late Mr. G. Tejmull Surana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
This Suo Motu Contempt Petition has been initiated by this Court against the contemnor as per the order dated 17.02.2020 of the Hon’ble Chief Justice in R.O.C. No.1278/2020/OS.
2. The contemnor had originally filed a writ petition in W.P.No.24580 of 2017 before this Court and the same came to be dismissed by order dated 12.11.2019. While dismissing the said writ petition, this Court had taken serious note of the nature of allegations and imputations made by the contemnor against the judicial institution and the learned Judges. In view of the scandalous averments and the tenor of the pleadings, this Court had observed that the conduct of the contemnor warranted initiation of appropriate contempt proceedings. Since the said order forms the very foundation for initiation of the present suo motu contempt proceedings, it would be appropriate to refer to the same. Accordingly, the entire order dated 12.11.2019 passed in the writ proceedings is extracted hereunder :-
"The petitioner has filed this writ petition as a party-in-person.
2.When this case was listed on 22.10.2019, the party-in-person was not present before this Court. Therefore, this Court adjourned the c
The judgment highlights the gravity of contempt for derogatory statements against judicial authority, emphasizing accountability under the Contempt of Courts Act.
Allegations of bias and pre-judgement against judges, made with the intent to intimidate them, constitute criminal contempt of court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an advocate's conduct of making false, baseless, and mischievous allegations against the court and its judges, thereby scandalizing and loweri....
Contempt of Court by Advocate – Unconditional apology tendered by contemnor cannot always dilute his act.
The court affirmed that public criticisms and unfounded allegations against judges constitute contempt, undermining judicial authority and integrity.
The court emphasized the necessity of maintaining judicial dignity and the procedural safeguards required in contempt proceedings, highlighting that failure to frame specific charges violates natural....
Allegations undermining judicial authority and disrupting court proceedings constitute criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The act of fabricating and filing documents on behalf of the Union of India by an individual constitutes criminal contempt and is punishable under the Contempt of Courts Act.
Any act which prejudices or interferes or intends to interfere with the due course of the judicial proceedings or an act which interferes or intends to interfere with the administration of justice wo....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
