GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT Suo Motu (Crl) Contempt Petition No.929/2020 High Court of Madras –vs- E.Satish Kumar and another dated 27.08.2021. Hon’ble Justice P.N.Prakash and R.N.Manjula held that two lawyers found guilty of Criminal Contempt and punished the Petitioner/Advocate with fine and his Senior with Contempt of Courts one month simple imprisonment on 3 Counts and held as follows:

GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT

Suo Motu (Crl) Contempt Petition No.929/2020 High Court of Madras –vs- E.Satish Kumar and another dated 27.08.2021.
Hon’ble Justice P.N.Prakash and R.N.Manjula held that two lawyers found guilty of Criminal Contempt and punished the Petitioner/Advocate with fine and his Senior with Contempt of Courts one month simple imprisonment on 3 Counts and held as follows:
1) That they have acted in tandem and hatched a devious plot to manufacture the vexations in W.P.No.14434/2020, on the strength of patently false affidavit which was calculated to any only dislodge the then Registrar(Vigilance) from her post, but also bring down the prestige of the High Court
2) And in addition, the duo had caused the petition to be widely circulated in the Press even prior to the admission of the matter before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras and had thus brought the administration of justice into dispute in the eyes of the public, without realizing the fact that their conduct as Officers of the court would amount to recklessly hurling stones at the institution, thereby bringing the administration of justice into disrepute.
3) The Branch also quoted the judgment of the Full Bench of the Madras High Court in Sullivan – vs- Norton (10 SLR Madras 28 Reprinted in 2006 (1) (CTC 134) in which the following famous passage from The Judgment of the Queen’s Bench Division in Munster-vs -Lamb, has been quoted with approval “If anyone needs to be free of all fear in the performance of arduous duty, advocate is that person”.

4) It is further held that, however, Vasudevan was not charged for fearlessly representing the case of Satish Kumar, but for engineering a patently false case in tandem with Satish Kumar to sling mud at a serving judicial officer and to embarrass the judiciary.

You may also like...