Soertsz A. C. J., Keuneman S.P.J. And Wijeyewardene J.

1945 Present: Soertsz A. C. J., Keuneman S.P.J. and Wijeyewardene J.

IN THE MATTER OF A RULE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 47
OF THE COURTS ORDINANCE ON P. RAGUPATHY,
ADVOCATE.

Contempt of Court-Passage in petition of appeal-Calculated to bring Judge into contempt or lower his authority-Inadequate apology by respondent.

Rule was issued under section 47 of the Courts Ordinance on the respondent, an Advocate, in respect of a certain passage appearing in a petition of appeal addressed to the Court of Criminal Appeal, which he had drafted and presented for signature to the prisoners concerned.

The passage was in the following terms: -

" His Lordship suggested to witnesses for the prosecution answers which enabled them to shape the evidence in a manner which made the case for the prosecution more convincing than on the evidence as it otherwise stood ".

In his affidavit the party noticed averred that he had no intention to convey a sinister or derogatory meaning, maintained that the words used did not amount to a contempt of Court and added that in view of the fact that the Rule issued showed that it appeared to the Sup

Click Here to Read the rest of this document