THEHONOURABLEMR.JUSTICEM.DHANDAPANI CRL.O.P.NO.10387OF2021 1.TanujaRajan@TanujaKanthula 2.PreetiRajan ..Petitioners

CRL.O.P.No.10387/2021

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATMADRAS

Reservedon	Pronouncedon
17.06.2021	18.06.2021

CORAM

THEHONOURABLEMR.JUSTICEM.DHANDAPANI

CRL.O.P.NO.10387OF2021

1.TanujaRajan@TanujaKanthula

2.PreetiRajan ..Petitioners

-Vs-

1.State,rep.By InspectorofPolice

G-7,ChetpetPoliceStation Chennai600031.

2.BarCouncilofTamilNadu

Chennai.                 ..

Respondents

(R-2impleadedvideorderof

Courtdated15.6.2021)

CriminalOriginalPetitionfiledu/s438Cr.P.C.prayingthisCourtto enlargethepetitioners/accusedonbailintheeventofarrestbythe respondentpoliceinCrimeNo.192of2021pendinginvestigationbefore therespondent.

ForPetitioners :Ms.A.LouisalRamesh

ForRespondent:Mr.A.Gopinath,GA(Crl.Side)forR-1

1/1

Mr.HajaMohideenGisthiforR-2

ORDER

LadyJusticeistheallegoricalpersonificationofthemoralforcein judicialsystems.Herattributesareablindfold,abeambalance,anda swordandthebalancedenotesthatjusticeneedstobedeliveredwitheyes closedandearsopen.Truetothesaidanalogy,whichhasbeenfollowed timeimmemorial,thejusticedeliverysysteminourcountryisfollowingthe sametodeliverimpartialjusticetooneandallwithoutreferencetoanyof theirpersonaltraits.

2.OnesuchcaseisonboardthisCourtintheformofamemberof thelegalfraternitybeingimplicatedinCrimeNo.192/2021fortheoffences punishableu/s269,270,290,294(b),353and506(i)IPCandSection51 (b)oftheDisasterManagementAct.AnticipatoryBailwassoughtforby thepetitionersherein,whowereimplicatedinthesaidcasebeforethe learnedPrincipalSessionsJudge,Chennaiandonitsrejection,the petitionersarebeforethisCourtpleadingsimilarreliefatthehandsofthis Court.

2/2

3.Thesumandsubstanceofthecaseregisteredbytherespondent policeisthatthe2^ndpetitionerwasstoppedbypoliceofficialsondutyon theearlymorninghours(7.15a.m.)of6.6.2021,whileshewasproceeding inhercar. Therebeinglockdownguidelinesinforce,inviewofthe pandemicthatisravagingtheentirehumanrace,andtheprovisionsofthe DisasterManagementActhavingbeenenforced,the2^ndpetitioner’s vehiclewasstoppedandonqueryastothereasonforthe2^ndpetitioner comingoutduringthesaidperiod,whileitistheversionofthe2^nd petitionerthatshehadcomeoutforthepurposeofpurchasingmedicines, however,onbehalfoftherespondents,itisinformedthatthe2^ndpetitioner hadstatedthatshehadcomeoutforpurchasingfish.Itistobepointed outthatthe2^ndpetitionerwasnotinpossessionofavalidpassforgoing outduringthelockdownperiod.

4.Bethatasitmay.Enquiryresultedinthe2^ndpetitionerinforming thatshehasnorequisiteofficialpermissiontocomeoutforthesaid errandresultinginthelawenforcingagencyissuingachallanforpayment offinetothetuneofRs.500/-.Heretoo,twoversionsrelatingtopayment offine,oneonbehalfofthepetitionersandotheronbehalfofthe

3/3

respondentsareplaced,ofwhich,forreasonsstatedintheorderpassed bytheCourtbelow,thecourtbelowhasacceptedtheversionprojectedby therespondentsandthisCourtforthepresentisnotconcernedonthe saidaspect.

5.Thewholemeleestartedonlyafterissuanceofthechallan.Itis theallegationoftheprosecutionthatonthechallanbeingissued,the2^nd petitionerquarreledwiththepoliceofficialsondutyand,thereafter,hada telephonicconversation,whichresultedinthearrivalofthe1^stpetitionerat thesceneinanothercar.Theresultantscenethereafterishistory,which wasflashedthroughoutthelengthandbreadthoftheStatebythevisual media.Theoverallpictureofthesaidscene,accordingtotheprosecution, isthatthe1^stpetitioner,claimingandproclaimingthatsheisanadvocate, usedfilthy,abusiveandunparliamentarylanguage,usedderogatorywords andcastigatedthepoliceofficialsondutyandinfactthreatenedthemthat theywillbestrippedofftheiruniforms,iftheytriedtointerveneandcause anyhindrancetothemovementofthepetitioners. Sodoing,the1^st petitionerescortedthe2^ndpetitionertothecarwhichthe2^ndpetitionerwas drivingandboththepetitionersleftinthetwocars,inwhichtheyhadcome.

4/4

Thewholescenewasenactedinthefullviewofthegeneralpublicinwhich, accordingtotherespondents,thepoliceofficials,whoweredischarging theirlawfulduty,weresmearedalloverwithmudbythe1^stpetitioner. Therefore,fortotalviolationofthelockdownguidelinesandnon-adherence totheprovisionsoftheDisasterManagementActandviolationofthe provisionsoftheIndianPenalCode,thepetitionerswereslappedwithby filingoftheabovecomplaintleadingtotheregistrationofthecase.

6.WhenthematterwaslistedbeforethisCourton15.6.2021,forthe firsttime,whilethisCourtlamentedaboutthedescendencyinthe professionalapproachandbehaviourofsomeofthemembersofthelegal fraternity,whichcastsadarkspotoverthewholemultitudeofpersons practicingthelegalprofession,withoutgoingintotheissuewhichwas placedbeforethisCourt,withaviewtofindouttheshortcomingswhich haveledtothepitiablestatewheretheBar,whichhadcommandedrespect andappreciationnotonlyforitslegalacumenbutalsoformaintainingits professionalandethicalstandardsfromthelegalcommunitythroughout theNation,thoughtitjustandnecessarytoimpleadtheBarCouncilof

TamilNadutoplacebeforeitthemechanism,whichisinplace,fortaking

5/5

actionagainsttheerringadvocates,who,withscantregardtotheir professionalstatus,trytobesmirchthewholelegalprofessionfortheir individualbenefitandnecessity.ThisCourt,therefore,directedtheBar CouncilofTamilNadu,beingtheregulatoryauthority,tofileastatusreport astomechanismthatisinplacefortakingactiontakenagainstsuchof thoseunrulyadvocates,whocastsaslurbytheiract,demeaningthewhole legalprofessionwithoutbotheringabouttheimpactoftheiractsonthe disciplinedandlawabidingmembersofthelegalfraternity.

7.InfurtherancetothesaiddirectionissuedbythisCourt,status reporthasbeenfiledbytheimpleaded2^ndrespondent.Beforegoingonto appreciatetheissuerelatingtograntofanticipatorybailtothepetitioners inthepresentcase,thisCourtwouldliketohaveabird’seyeviewofthe statusreportfiledbythe2^ndrespondent.

8.Whilethestatusreporthastabulatedtheproceduresprovidedin theAdvocatesActfortakingactionagainsttheerringadvocatesinthe dischargeoftheirprofessionalduties,emphasiswaslaidonSection35of theAdvocatesActtostressthatthe2^ndrespondent,onreceiptof

6/6

complaintagainstanyadvocate,whohasbeenguiltyofprofessionalor othermisconduct,uponscrutinyofthecomplaint,refersthemattertothe tiersofauthorityconstitutedforthispurposeuntilitreachesthedoorof theGeneralCounciloftheBarCouncilofTamilNaduwhichconsidersthe issuefordecidingcontemplationoffurtherproceedingsagainstthe members.Thestepsfollowingthesaiddecisionarealsotabulatedinthe statusreport.Further,theavenuesopentotheperson,whohasbeen proceededwithhasalsobeenprovided.

9.Itistobepointedoutthatthemechanismasenvisagedu/s35of theAdvocatesActforproceedingagainstamemberoftheBarfor unprofessionalconductorothermisconducthasbeenplacedbeforethe Court,however,thesaidprovisionspeaksonlyaboutthecomplaint receivedonwhichactionisinitiatedbytheBarCouncil.However,insofar asinstances,whichcomestotheknowledgeoftheBarCouncilforwhich nocomplaintisreceivedbytheBarCouncil,itisnotclearastowhatisthe mechanismbywhichtheBarCouncilinitiatesactionagainsttheconcerned member,ifatallitinitiatesanyactionagainstsucherringmembers.Itis alsonotclearfromthestatusreportastothesuomotupowersoftheBar

7/7

Councilindealingwithsuchinstances,wheretheunprofessionalact comestotheknowledgeoftheBarCouncil,thoughnotonthebasisofa complaint,inwhichcases,thematterssuchasthesegounnoticed,though itisinthepublicdomainandreachestheearsandeyesofthepublic throughthevisualmedia. However,thestatusreportissilent,which wouldonlyleadtotheinferencethatgenerallynoactionistakenagainst suchpersons,ifthereisnocomplaintbeforetheBarCouncil. Itisalso notclearwhethertheBarCouncilhasdeliberatedonthisaspectof initiationofsuomotuactionagainstsuchunrulymembersoftheBar,who damageandstatureandsanctityoftheinstitutionandalsothemembers associatedwiththesaidinstitution.

10.Pausinghereforamomentonthisaspect,thisCourt,before proceedingfurtheronthisissue,wouldfirstofalturnitseyestotheissue onhand,viz.,relatingtothegrantofanticipatorybailtothepetitioners.

11.Learnedcounselappearingforthepetitionerssubmittedthatin theheatofthemoment,inordertosafeguardthe2^ndpetitioner,whoisthe daughterofthe1^stpetitionerfromthearmofthepolice,the1^stpetitioner

8/8

hadactedinhasteandhadspokenoutwords,whicharedefinitelynot intentionalandnotintendedtomalignthereputationofthepoliceforce. Equally,inthesamestead,itissubmittedthattheactofthepolicewiththe 2^ndpetitioner,theactswhichhavenotbeenspeltoutorvisuallydisplayed, butneverthelessspokentobythepoliceofficialsatthescene,alsoacted ascatalystintheoutburstofthe1^stpetitioner,whichisneitherwilfulnor wantonand,therefore,pleadstothesympathyofthisCourttoenlargeboth thepetitionersonbail,moresotakingintoconsiderationthegenderofthe petitioners.

12.LearnedGovernmentAdvocate(Crl.Side)counteringthesaid submissions,submittedthatthe1^stpetitionerbelongstothelegal profession,asspokentobyherbeforethepoliceofficialsandthatthe2^nd petitionerisalsoa4^thyearlawstudentandbothbeingwithinthe frameworkofthelegalsystem,aredutyboundtoexhibitmorecaution whilespeakingoutintheopeninpublicview.However,withscantregard totheirpositionandalsothestatureofthepoliceofficialsandalsothe workbeingdonebythemduringthecalamitoussituation,hasspokenina manner,unbecomingofalawofficeroftheCourtand,therefore,thisCourt

9/9

shouldnotadoptthesameyardstickasisbeingadoptedtothegeneral public,buttheyardstickfixedshouldbeofsuchanaturethatthestatureof themembersofthelegalprofessionshouldstandelevatedintheeyesof thegeneralpublic,inthattheyshouldbeplacedastherolemodelsofthe society.Itisfurthersubmittedonbehalfoftherespondentsthatthe venomexhibitedbythe1^stpetitioneragainstthepoliceofficialsinfull publicviewshouldnotbebrushedaside,astheintemperatean unparliamentarylanguageusedbythe1^stpetitionerusingfilthy,abusive andderogatoryremarksagainstthepoliceofficialsshouldnotbetreated lightlyasthesamewillsendawrongsignaltothesociety.Thetrialcourt, onproperappreciationofthematerialsplacedbytheprosecution,has rejectedthereliefsoughtforbythepetitionersandthisCourt,tosenda sternwarningtosuchofthoseunrulyelementswhoareactingasmolesin thenobleprofession,whotrytodemeantheotherrespectfulandgenuine membersoftheprofession,byresortingtosuchunprofessionalacts,and, therefore,thisCourtmaynotgrantthereliefsoughtforbythepetitioners.

13.ThisCourtpaiditsundividedattentiontothesubmissions advancedbythelearnedcounselappearingoneithersideandalso

10/10

perusedthematerialsavailableonrecordandinparticulartotherecording ofreasonsadducedbythelearnedPrincipalJudge.

14.Thesumandsubstanceoftheargumentofthelearnedcounsel forthepetitionersisthatthe1^stpetitioner,duetohermotherlyaffinity towardsherchild,viz.,the2^ndpetitionerhadbehavedinsuchamanner, whichshouldbelookedatonlythroughtheeyesofthemotherandnot throughtheeyesoflaw,butmuchthroughtheeyesofthesociety,inwhich themothertakescareofherchildandinsuchabackdrop,theact committedbythe1^stpetitionercouldhaveonlyaminimalimpact,thereby givingthebenefittoherforanaffirmativeorderatthehandsofthisCourt.

15.Thoughtheargumentofthelearnedcounselforthepetitioner, asnoticedabove,attheoutset,looksattractiveonthefaceitandeven triestotouchtheconscienceofthisCourt,however,onamuchmore deeperanalysisofthematerialsavailableonrecord,thesamerevealsa verysorrystateofaffairsinwhichthe1^stpetitioner,usingthegarbofan advocate,hasnotonlytriedtostrongarmtheuniformedforce,butisalso

11/11

tryingtotakethisCourtforaridebytryingtoshedcrocodiletearsforher acts,saidtohavebeencommittedunwittinglybyher.

16.Aperusaloftherecordsrevealthatthepoliceofficialsonduty hadstoppedthecarofthe2^ndpetitionerandonenquiry,itwasascertained thatthevehiclewasplyingwithoutthenecessarypass,asisrequired underthelockdownguidelinesissuedundertheDisasterManagementAct. Whenenquiredaboutthereasonforhertravel,the2^ndpetitionerhad initiallytoldthepoliceauthoritiesthatshewasonherwaytobuyfish, whichlaterseemedtohavebeenchangedtomedicines,oninstructions,as isfoundintheorderpassedbythetrialcourt.Whenitwaspointedout thatthereasonthe2^ndpetitionerwasoutwasnotonaccountofany essentialfunctionandthatshehadviolatedthelockdownguidelinesand whenshewasissuedwithachallanforpayingfineforusingthevehicle amidstthetravelrestrictions,the2^ndpetitioner,hadcontactedthe1^st petitioner,whocamethereinanotherfourwheeler,whereinafter,the episodeunfolded.

12/12

17.Acursoryperusalofthedetailedorderrejectingtheanticipatory bailpleasofthepetitionersbythetrialcourtrevealthatnotonlythe petitionerstriedtochangetheirstanceastotheneedforthembeingout, but,thereafter,thedetailingoftheincidentbythetrialcourtleavesasour tasteinthemouthofthisCourtonseeingtheconductofthe1^stpetitioner.

18.Itistheversionoftherespondentsthatonthe1^stpetitioner arrivingatthescene,shenotonlythrewthechallan,whichwasissuedto the2^ndpetitionerbythepoliceauthorities,onthem,but,thereafter,had usedabusive,derogatory,filthyandscathingwordsonthepoliceofficials inahighpitchedvoice,thedetailsofwhichhavebeenextractedinthe bodyoftheorderbythetrialcourtafterviewingtheCDproducedbythe respondentsbeforethetrialcourt.Thewords,whichhavebeenextracted intheorder,areofthehighestdegreeofabusethatcouldbethrownatthe policeofficials,whohavebeenmaintainingthelawandorderoftheState duringthegraveperiodwhenthepandemicisblowingthehumanraceinto smithereens. Thewordsusedbythepoliceofficialsforthewrongfulact committedbythepetitioners,ifnottothelikingofthe1^stpetitioner,cannot pavethewayforhertoactinsuchafashion,denigratingthedignityofthe

13/13

legalprofessionbeforetheeyesofthegeneralpublic.Itistobepointed outthatthepolicepersonnelhavebeenoneofthefrontlineworkersin tryingtocurbthespreadofthedeadlyvirusbymaintainingthelockdown guidelinesimposedbytheGovernmentfromtimetotimesinceMarch, 2020anditisfurthertobepointedoutthatthepandemicisnotyetover andcautionhasbeengivenabouttheon-comingofthe3^rdand4^thwave, whicharepredictedtohaveastillmoredetrimentalimpactonthehuman race.Suchbeingthecase,whenpersonswithoutanyrhymeorreason wanderoutsideduringtheperiodoflockdown,itisjustandnecessarythat thelawenforcingagencyisdutyboundtoactinamannerasisexpected ofthemsothattheferocityofthevirusiscontrolledtosomeextent.Itis furthertobepointedoutthatthepolicepersonnelhavenotonlybeen workingovertime,butalsoworkingwithleastconcernoftheirfamilyand themselvesandhavebeendedicatingtheirlivestothecauseofhumanity. Insuchascenario,theleastexpectedofthegeneralpublicandalsothe intellectualgroupoflegalprofessionalsthattheyshouldbegiventhe minimumbasicrespectandcourtesywhilehandlingthem.

14/14

19.Thoughitisthecontentionofthelearnedcounselforthe petitionersbeforethetrialcourtthattheabusivelanguageusedbythe policepersonnelhadprovokedthe1^stpetitioner,whichresultedinthe1^st petitionerhurlingabusesagainstthepolicepersonnelbyusingderogatory andfilthylanguage,however,thesaidsubmissionadvancedonbehalfof thepetitionersisnotsubstantiatedbyrecords,asisevidentfromtheorder ofthetrialcourt,whichhasbeenpassedafterviewingtheCDrecorded duringtheoccurrence.Further,therecordingmadebythetrialcourtinits orderafterviewingtheCDrevealsaverysorrystateofaffairs.

20.Theorderofthetrialcourtrevealsthatonthe1^stpetitioner arrivingatthescene,sheusedabusive,unparliamentaryandderogatory wordsandwenttotheextentofthreateningthepolicepersonnelthatshe willstripthemoftheiruniforms.Thewordsusedbythe1^stpetitionerare notonlyfilthyandabusive,butthesaidwordswoulddefinitelyhurttheego, prideandself-respectofanyperson,beitapoliceofficialoracommon man.

15/15

21.Itisfurthertobepointedoutthatthoughthepoliceauthorities askedthe1^stpetitionertowearthemask,whichisamandatory requirementunderthelockdownguidelinesissuedundertheDisaster ManagementAct,yetthe1^stpetitioner,notevenshowedscantrespectto thewordsofthepoliceofficials,butmadethe2^ndpetitionertoboardher car,whilesheboardedintheothercarinwhichshecameandmovedaway fromthesceneaftercreatingascene.Itisfurthertobepointedoutthat thewholeoccurrencehappenedinbroaddaylightinopenpublicplace. Thereafter,thevideoshotoftheoccurrencehadgoneviralinsocialmedia. Ifreallythestandofthe1^stpetitionerthatthepoliceofficialshad misbehavedwiththe2^ndpetitioneristrue,the2^ndpetitionercouldhave raisedalarm,whichwouldhaveattractedtheattentionofthepublic. However,nosuchstandhasbeentakenbythepetitionerseitherbeforethe courtbeloworbeforethisCourt.Thereisnotevenashredofevidenceor materialplacedbythepetitionerstoshowthatthemisbehaviourofthe policeofficialstowardsthe2^ndpetitionerwasthereasonfortheoutburst ofthe1^stpetitioner.

16/16

22.Inthebackdropoftheabovefacts,asunfolded,theutterances ofthe1^stpetitioneraboutherbeinganadvocateassumesgreater importance. Itistobepointedoutevenattheveryoutsetthatan advocateisalsoacitizen,ascommonasalltheotherpersons.Only becauseofhisavocationandhissocialmindedacts,theadvocatesriseup thepedestalandinfactthatisthereasonthelawhasgiventhemthe staturetoquestioneventhepolice.Butthatstatureshouldbeusedina legalandlawfulmannerwithoutmaligningthereputationandpositionof anyindividualpersonoranyofficialoftheGovernment.Itisfurthertobe stressedthatadvocatesarenotabovelawand,infact,itistheadvocates whohavetogivemorerespecttothelaw,asitistheirbreadandbutter. Usageofthepositionofadvocateforotherthanjustcausesisnothingbut anactofcorruptnature,whichrequirestobecutdownbytheswordheld inthehandsofthestatueofJustice.Thedutyofanadvocateistoseeto itthattheruleoflawisfollowedirrespectiveofthedamagethatitwould causetohisself.ThedoyensoftheBar,moreespeciallytheMadrasBar, haveheldalofttheruleoflawforcenturiestogetherandMadrasBaris alwayslookeduponwithaweandadmiration. But,nowadays,afew members,justtoenrichthemselvesandfortheirselfishcause,throwto

17/17

thewindsthelargerinterestofthelegalfraternityandcauseirreparable damagetotheothermembersofthelegalprofessionbytheiracts,ashas beendoneinthepresentcase.

23.The1^stpetitioner,beingamemberofthecovetedlegal profession,oughttohavekepttheinterestoftheprofessioninmindwhen speakingoutinpublic,assuchactsofoneorothermemberofthelegal fraternitywillleaveanindeliblescaronthewholelegalfraternityandpaint agloomypictureinthemindsofthegeneralpublic.Further,itistobe pointedoutthatthe1^stpetitionerwasindulginginsuchanactinfrontof herdaughter,viz.,the2^ndpetitioner,whoissaidtobea4^thyearlawstudent. Insuchabackdrop,itismoreexpectedofthe1^stpetitionertoteachthe2^nd petitionertheethicsforfollowingtheruleoflaw,asotherwise,heractasin thepresentcase,wouldengraveuponthemindofthe2^ndpetitioner,which wouldnotbeawelcomesigntothelegalprofession. Notonlyasa mother,butalsoasaseniortoherdaughterintheprofession,the1^st petitioneroughttohaveconductedherselfinamannerbefittingthestatus ofanadvocateandherfailuretodoso,notonlytarnishedtheimageofthe legalfraternityintheeyesofthegeneralpublicbutwouldalsohavea

18/18

lingeringeffectonthemindofthe2^ndpetitioner,whoistofilltheshoesof hermotherinthelegalfieldinthedaystocome.

24.Itisanacceptedfactthatwomenareembodimentsofwealth, courage,wisdom,affection,patienceandwhatnot.Buttheactofthe1^st petitionerinfullpublicviewdemolishesthewellacceptedphenomenon aboutthevirtueofpatienceofwomen,whichhasbeenequatedtobeeven greaterthanseabymanyofthepoetsandphilosophers.Thepressing intoserviceoftheargumentthatthe1^stpetitionerwastryingtoprotecther daughterfromtheverbalattacksofthepoliceauthoritiesaremere figmentsofimaginationwhichhasflownfromthelegalmindsthathad workedonthiscase.The2^ndpetitionerwasnotachildnotknowing anything.The2^ndpetitionerwasastudentoflaw,studying4^thyearand shewouldbeverywellawareofherrightsandasalawstudent,wouldvery wellbeacourageousgirl.Shehadbeengoingalonedrivingthefour wheelerwhenshewasinterceptedbythepoliceandsheevenhadthe presenceofmindtocallhermotheronceshewasissuedwithachallanfor fine. Therefore,thewebwovenasifthe2^ndpetitionerhadsufferedilltreatmentatthehandsofthepolicewhichledtothefrontalattackbythe

19/19

1^stpetitionerunmindfulofthefactthatthewholeepisodewasbeing enactedinfullpublicviewshowsthecourageandcunningnessofthe1^st petitionerthatherprofessionalstature,whichshehadpushedtothe forefrontevenatthestartoftheskirmish,wouldactasashieldto safeguardherfromanytypeofactthatsheperforms.IfthisCourtallows suchamindsettogounnoticed,itwouldbeagreatinjusticethatthisCourt wouldbedoingtothelegalprofessionandalsotothegenuine,dignified andrespectfullegalprofessionals,whorespectthisprofessionandthe robestheywearandwouldalsobesendingawrongsignaltothe2^nd petitioner,whoisslowlyclimbinguptheladdertoenterthelegal profession. ThisCourtshouldnotbeamutespectatortothelegal gimmicksthatisbeingperformedforgettingthe1^stpetitioneroutofthe jaminwhichshehasentrappedherself.

25.Itisfurthertobehighlightedthatlawisthesame,beitforthe richorthepoorandthescalesofjusticeshouldbalanceequallyand shouldnottiltinfavourofoneortheotherforconsiderationsotherthan justice.Inthecaseonhand,therearemorethanenoughmaterialsplaced bytherespondentstoshowcasetheactofthe1^stpetitioner,whohad

20/20

conductedherselfinbadlightinfrontofthegeneralpublicandhad broughtdowntherespectandregardthelegalfraternityhadbeforethe publicatlarge.Thoughitisarguedthatitisanisolatedincidentinwhich the1^stpetitionerhadcommittedsuchanactonaccountofsudden provocationduetotheactofthepoliceofficialstowardsherdaughter,but thesamedoesnotmeritacceptanceforthesimplereasonthatthisisnot anisolatedincidentasprojected,butaperusaloftheorderofthetrial courtrevealsthatthe1^stpetitionerhadconductedherselfinsimilar mannerduringtheelectioncheckinwhichcasealso,shehadprojected herselfasanadvocateandimmunetoanychecksthatthepolicemay conduct. Thewholeactofthe1^stpetitionerisnotonlydemeaningthe legalfraternityinbadlightinfrontofthepublic,butitisaclearmisuseof herpositionandprofessionalprivilegeasanadvocatetofurtherhercause, whichisimpermissible.Allthecontentionsputforthonbehalfofthe1^st petitionerareonlyinventedoutofthinstrawmerelyforthepurposeof extricatingherselffromthepositionwhichshehaspushedherselfintoand thisCourtcannottakealenientviewtothebenefitofthe1^stpetitioneras suchanactbythisCourtwouldsendawrongsignaltothewholesociety thatthewatchdogofthesociety,viz.,theJudiciary,isfallingintoan

21/21

unenviabletraplaiddownbycertainunscrupulouselementslikethe1^st petitionertoaxethewholelegalfraternityandpushthemintooblivion. ThisCourtcannotbeamutespectatortosuchanactandintheabove backdropofthefactsandcircumstancesaselucidatedabove,thisCourtis oftheconsideredopinionthatshowinganyleniencytothe1^stpetitionerby accedingtoherrequestwouldbenothingbutcuttingtheverybranchon whichtheJudiciaryissittingandwouldpainttheJudiciaryinverybadlight intheeyesofthegeneralpublic,whohavebeenwitnessestooneofthe mostbitterincidentsandsowingintheirmindsaviewthatanadvocate canextricateherselfofffromanycircumstanceandthatJudiciarywould onlyaidtotheircausemuchtothedetrimentoftheothermembersofthe generalpublic,includingtheuniformedforce.Fortheabovereasons,this Courtisnotinclinedtoshowanyleniencytothe1^stpetitionerand, accordingly,isnotinclinedtoaccedetotherequestoftheofthe1^st petitionerforgrantofanticipatorybail.

26.Insofarasthe2^ndpetitionerisconcerned,itcouldbesafely concludedfromthematerialsavailableonrecordthatbutfortheinitialpart wheresheisallegedtohavequarreledwiththepoliceofficialsandnot

22/22

adheringtothelockdownguidelinesandbeingoutontheroadswithout thenecessaryofficialpass,shehasnotindulgedinanyotheractsthat wouldspoilthereputationofthestudentcommunityasalsothelegal fraternity,shebeingalawstudent.Thequarrelthatthe2^ndpetitioneris allegedtohavehadwiththepoliceofficialsonthefatefuldaycannotbe saidtobeawrongdoing,asitisthemindsetofalmosteveryindividual, whoisbeingstoppedbythepolice,beitduringthepandemicperiodor evenduringothertimes,toenterintoquarrelandtojustifytheiractions. Merequarrelingwiththepoliceofficialscannotbesaidtobeawrongful act,whichwouldattractthepenalprovisionspressedintoservicebythe respondentsagainstthe2^ndpetitionerandanyviewtakentothecontra wouldbenegatingtherightsguaranteedtothecitizensunderthe Constitution. ThisCourtisalsoconsciousofthefactthatthe2^nd petitionerbeingastudentandapersonofyoungerage,istobeguardedby thisCourtfromtheclutchesofanycriminalprosecution,lestthewhole careerofthe2^ndpetitionerwouldstandruined.Butforthe1^stpetitioner enteringthearenaonreceivingthecallfromthe2^ndpetitionerand launchingaverbalattackonthepoliceauthorities,suchadeplorable situationwouldneverhavehappened.The2^ndpetitioner,aspointedout

23/23

above,beingastudentandoftenderage,butbeingastudentinlaw,also beingawareoftheintricaciesrelatingtofilingofanoffence,thoughnot graveinnature,hadcalleduponthe1^stpetitionerandsuchanactcannot beclubbedwiththeactofthe1^stpetitionertoincludethe2^ndpetitionerin thewebofcriminalityandchargeherunderthepenalprovisions.This Courtshouldalsobemindfuloftheageandfutureofthe2^ndpetitionerand keepingtheaboveinmind,thisCourtisoftheconsideredviewthattheact ofthe2^ndpetitionerdefinitelydoesnotwarrantattractinganyofthe offenceswithwhichshehasbeencharged.However,itistobepointed outthatthepresentpetitionfiledisonlyforanticipatorybailandnotforthe purposeofquashingthecaseregisteredagainstthe2^ndpetitionerandin viewofthelimitedscopeandjurisdictionavailabletothisCourt,thisCourt isoftheconsideredopinionthatthe2^ndpetitioner,forthereasonings aforesaid,isentitledtothereliefofanticipatorybail.ThisCourtalso wouldliketopointoutthattheinitiationofproceedingsagainstthe2^nd petitionerfortheoffencesabove,aretotallyunwarrantedandnot necessitatedandthelawenforcingagency,whilechargingpersons,should alsokeepinmindthefutureoftheindividualandnotgetcarriedawayby emotions,byfilingsuchcases.Thelawenforcingagencyismannedby

24/24

persons,whohavetheexperienceindealingwithcriminalsandnoteach andeveryindividual,whocommitamistakeshouldbebrandedasa criminalbybringingtheindividualwithinthefourcornersofthepenalcode. Thelawenforcingagencyshouldalsobearinmindthattheyounger generationsoftodayarethepillarsofourcountryandtheyshouldbe groomedinsuchafashionthattheyrealisetheirdutiesandresponsibilities andcomeupaslawabidingcitizens.Unnecessaryinflictionofcharges ofthisnatureoneveryindividualwouldonlymaketheindividuallookinto theloopholesofthesystemandtrytowriggleoutofthesameafter committingmistakes,whichshouldbeavoidedatallcosts. Thelaw enforcingagencyshallkeepinmindtheabovewhileslappingcases henceforthagainstindividuals.ThisCourt,inthefitnessofthings,isof theconsideredviewthattherespondentsshallponderdroppingofallthe chargesmadeagainstthe2^ndpetitioner,asthisCourtfeelsthatthereisno substanceinthesaidcharges.

27.NowcomingtothequeryaddressedbythisCourttothe2^nd respondentrelatingtothemechanismfordealingwitherringadvocates, forwhichstatusreporthasbeenfiledandwhichhasbeenanalysedbythis

25/25

Courtintheearlierpartoftheorder,itistobepointedoutthatBarCouncil, beingtheregulatorybody,shouldbemoreproactiveintoday’sscenariofor maintainingitsdignityandgrandeur,whichithasbeenenjoyingforquite longbygroomingindividuals,whostarttheprofession,intomodelcitizens. Aspointedoutduringthecourseofhearing,theonlypersonwhocanraise theirvoicewiththelawenforcingagencyisanadvocate.Lawhasgiven thelegalprofessionalsuchaprivilegeandstatus,butthesaidprivilegeis tobeusedsparinglyandonlyforupholdingthemajestyoflawand followingtheruleoflaw.Itisnotgivenforthepurposeofmaligningthe ruleoflawanddemeaningtheothermembersoftheBartothebenefitof theindividual.Consciouseffortshouldbemadebyoneandalltoact withintheboundariesoflaw.ThisCourtneednotpointoutthatlawyers knowmoreaboutthelawthanevenJudgesandJudges,moreoften,get educatedfromtheeruditeargumentsadvancedbythelawyers.Theflow ofknowledgefromthemindoftheadvocatesshouldbeforjustcause. Advocatesshouldnottakelawintotheirownhandsonthepremisethat theyarethecustodianoflaw;onthecontrary,theadvocatesbeingthe custodianoflaw,areboundtoactwithinthelegalframework,evenifthere isviolationoflawandestablishtheruleoflawthroughthewelldefined

26/26

mechanism.Anydeviationfromthesaidactwouldtakeawaythesaid individualoutofthelegalfraternityandbrandthemotherwise,whichwould bescaronthelegalprofessionasalsotheindividual,whoispracticingthe profession.

28.ItistobepointedoutthatthepreambleoftheBarCouncilof Indiarulespostulatesthat“AnAdvocateshall,atalltimes,comporthimself inamannerbefittinghisstatusasanofficeroftheCourt,aprivileged memberofthecommunity,andagentleman,bearinginmindthatwhat maybelawfulandmoralforapersonwhoisnotamemberoftheBar,or foramemberoftheBarinhisnon-professionalcapacitymaystillbe improperforanAdvocate.Withoutprejudicetothegeneralityofthe foregoingobligation,anAdvocateshallfearlesslyupholdtheinterestsof hisclient,andinhisconductconformtotheruleshereinaftermentioned bothinletterandinspirit.”Advocates,inadditiontobeingprofessionals, arealsoofficersofthecourtsandplayavitalroleintheadministrationof justice. 27/27

29.However,instancesofadvocatesgoingbeyondtheirbriefand actinginamannerprejudicialtotheinterestsofthelargeportionofthe legalfraternityisontheincrease.TheBarCouncil,asalsothevarious AssociationofAdvocates,cannotdisputethesaidfactthatthereare individuals,whoareharmingtheinterestofthelegalprofessionalsby indulginginacts,whichareagainsttheprofessionalethicsandalso againsttheoathofofficeoftheadvocates. ThisCourt,beingthe custodianofthelegalrightsofthecitizens,definitelyhastoimposeitself upontheBarCouncilsoastosafeguardthereputationanddignityofthe legalprofessionals,whopracticetheprofessionwithutmostdedication anddevotion.AnyinfractionbythisCourtinnotsafeguardingtheinterest ofthelegalprofessionwouldbeadoomfortheentirejudiciaryandthe legalfraternityasawhole.Onlywiththesaidobjectiveinmind,thisCourt, whilepassedtheorderon15.6.21,hadcalleduponthe2^ndrespondentto speakaboutthemechanism,whichithastodealwitherringadvocates, whobringdisreputetotheprofession.

30.Thescalableheightwhichalawyercouldreachisthepinnacleof attainingthepostofJudgeshipandthedecorumanddecencywitha

28/28

dignifiedapproacharethehallmarksthatarerequiredtobemaintainedby suchofthosepersonsinthelegalfield,whichwouldnotonlyenablethem toscalesuchheights,butwouldalsoprojectthelegalfraternityinproper lightbeforethegeneralpublic.Thelawyersaretherolemodelsforthe entirecommunityastheyareinstrumentswithwhichthelitigantsredress theirgrievanceandsolongastheinstrumentsaregood,theresultswould alsobegoodanddeteriorationintheinstrumentwouldonlyleadto deteriorationingeneralhealthofthepublic.

31.PursuanttothedirectionissuedbythisCourton15.6.21,the2^nd respondenthasplacedbeforetheCourtthemechanismthatisbeing followedindealingwithadvocates,whoindulgeinunprofessionalactsand othermisconducts. Itisevidentfromthesaidstatusreportthatthe mechanismrevolvesaroundtheprovisionsoftheAdvocatesAct.Itisthe fairsubmissiononbehalfoftheBarthatactionistakenonlyonthe complaintbeingreceivedbytheBarCouncilagainstanyerringadvocate. However,whatthisCourtismorebotheredaboutisthefactthatnotall unprofessionalconductorothermisconductsleadtoacomplaintbeing writtenbytheBarCouncil.However,intoday’stechnologicaloutburst,

29/29

visualmediacoversthenookandcornerofthecountryandbringtothe knowledgeofthepeoplethevariousactivitiesthatishappeningroundthe clock.Inthisscenario,whatbotherstheconscienceofthisCourtmoreis theactscommittedbyafewmiscreantsinthelegalprofessionthatcome totheknowledgeoftheBarCouncilforwhichnocomplaintemanates fromanyindividual,butwhichtendstoaffectthewholeofthelegal profession. Everyhappeningaroundthecountryisavailabletodayinthe palmofthehandsofeachandeveryindividual. Anyunprofessional conductofamemberofthelegalprofession,comingtotheknowledgeof theBarCouncilthroughthevisualmediaforwhichnocomplaintemanates fromanyquarter,cantheBarCouncilallowthatinstancetogounnoticed forthemerereasonthattheAdvocatesActdoesnotenvisagesuomotu action.Introspectionistheneedofthehourforthelegalprofessionto surviveandhaveitsdeeprootedtraditionsintact.

32.ThisCourtisinthepresentcaseonlyhearingacaserelatingto grantofanticipatorybailtothepetitioners.Buttheincidentswhichhave unfoldedinthepresentcasehasmadethisCourttointrospectonthis aspectandthoughthisCourtcannotgiveanypositivedirectiontotheBar

30/30

Counciltodoonethingortheother,asitisnotvestedwithjurisdiction,but definitely,intheinterestoftheinstitutionandalsothelegalfraternity,this Court,intheabovebackdrop,feelsthatitishightimetheBarCouncil enforcesSection35oftheAdvocatesAct,whichgivesitthepowerand authoritytoinitiateactionsuomotuontheincidents,whichcomestoits knowledgethroughthedigital/printmedia,forwhichthereisnocomplaint givenbyanyindividual.IftheBarCouncildoesnotactwithspeedand vigouratthishour,thisCourtcanonlyfeelandfailanditwouldbeno further.Thepowerhavingbeenprovidedu/s35oftheAdvocatesActfor initiatingsuomotuaction,adutyiscastontheBarCounciltoadheretothe saidprovisioninletterandspiritandthisCourthopesandtruststhatthe 2^ndrespondentwillinallearnestnessactinconsonancewiththeprovision byinitiatingactionsuomotuactionagainsterringindividuals,for unprofessionalconductorothermisconducts,whichcometoits knowledgethroughthedigital/printmediasothatthegloryoftheBaris heldaloft.

33.Inviewoftheforegoingdiscussionsmadeabove,thisCourtis oftheconsideredviewthatthispetitiondeservestobeallowedonlyin

31/31

partgrantinganticipatorybailtothe2^ndpetitionerwhiledismissingthe petitionerinsofarasthe1^stpetitionerrelatingtograntofanticipatorybail.

Accordingly,thispetitioninsofarasthe1^stpetitionerstandsdismissed.

34.Thepetitioninsofarasthe2^ndpetitionerisallowedandthe2^nd petitionerisdirectedtobeenlargedonbailonhersurrenderingbeforethe respondentpolicewithinaperiodof15daysfromthedateofreceiptofa copyofthisorderandexecuteapersonalbondforasumofRs.10,000/(RupeesTenThousandonly)beforetherespondentpolice.

35.Inthebackdropoftheabovematter,oneotherissue,whichwas anoff-shootoftheorderdated15.6.21assumessignificantimportance, whichrelatestotheadministrationofjusticeand,therefore,thisCourt feelsitjustandnecessarytodealwiththesameinthepresentpetition.

36.PursuanttotheinteractionsthisCourthadon15.6.21,whenthe casewastakenupforhearingwhichresultedintheissuanceofcertain directionstothe2^ndrespondents,afterimpleadingthe2^ndrespondent,it hascometolightthattherewasafuroreovertheorderspassedthatthis

32/32

Courthadtermedallthelawyersasmiscreants. Theabovescenario wasanoutcomeofeachandeveryoneoftheagitatedmindnotreadingthe order,butinterpretingthewordsofthisCourtonewayortheother.But morethanthefuroreovertheorder,therewasastandalonematter,which wasbroughttomynotice,whichhasnecessitatedthisCourttodealwith thesame.

37.ThesaidissuerelatestoaWhatsappaudiocirculatedbyone Mr.R.Krishnamurthi,amemberoftheBarandaccordingtohisversion supposedtobepracticingintheHon’bleSupremeCourt.Itisnotoutof contexttopointoutthatthesaidadvocatehasalsoappearedinthevideo conferencewhenthematterwasarguedbeforethetrialcourt. The audioproceedsonthefootingthatIhavetakenastand,whichdenigrates anddefamestheentiretyoftheadvocates.Infact,thesaidpersonhad goneontosaythatthewayIhadconductedtheCourtwasunbecomingof aJudgeandthatIhavenotgivenopportunitytoputforththesubmissions bytheparties.Infact,whenthematterwasplacedbeforeme,inviewof thegravityoftheactallegedbytheprosecutionagainstthepetitioners herein,mostespeciallyinthetryingtimes,IhadimpleadedtheBarCouncil

33/33

ofTamilNadutospelloutthemechanismdevisedbytheminconsonance withthevariousdecisionsoftheHon’bleSupremeCourtofIndiafortaking actionagainstsuchofthoseadvocates,whoconductthemselvesinan unrulyfashion,thereby,denigratinganddefamingthelegalprofession.

38.Thoughtheorderpassedbymewasonlytothelimitedextentof impleadingtheBarCouncilofTamilNaduandcallingforastatusreport, however,theaboveadvocatehadcirculatedtheaudioonthesocial networkingplatformsattributingmalafidestome.Theadvocatehas furtherstatedthatIshouldrecusefromhearingthecaseanyfurtherand hasalsoattributeddishonestyandalsostatedthatIamtakingalopsided viewinfavourofthelawenforcingagency.ThoughIhavecalledonlyfor certainparticulars,theadvocatehasgoneontomakeallegationsthatI havetakenabiasedviewandIamleaningtowardsthelawenforcing agencyandhasevencastedaspersionsagainstmeopenlyinthesocial networkingdomain.

39.Infact,theadvocatehasgoneontoimputeallegationsagainst theJudiciaryinfailingtotakeanyactionagainstthelawenforcingagency

34/34

forverymanyirregularitiescommittedbythemduringthepandemic situation,whicharenotinconsonancewithlaw.Theactoftheadvocateis verymuchcontumaciousandattractsinitiationofcriminalcontempt proceedings.Thewholeaudiopaintsaverygloomypictureandwithout anymaterialaspersionsareattributedagainstme.NeitherhaveIpassed anyordersonthemeritsofthecase,norhaveIinanywaydefamedthe advocatesorthelegalprofession,yet,theadvocatehasgoneontostate thatIhadnotheardtheargumentsofthecounselandthatIwasina predeterminedmindsettodecidethematter,whichisnothingbyimputing aspersionsagainstme,thoughthesaidadvocatewasneitherthecounsel onrecordforthepetitionernorinanywayconnectedwiththesaidcase.

40.Further,itwouldbejustandnecessarytoplaceonrecordthe factrecordedbythetrialcourtinitsorderdated10.06.2021. The materialportionofthesaidorderofthetrialcourt,asisfoundinpara-4of theaboveorder,isquotedhereunder:-

“4.Duringthecourseofsuchsubmission,thesenior counselMr.KrishnamoorthyandMr.D.Selvam,Memberof BarAssociationalsojoinedintheVideoConferenceand maderepresentationsindividuallyasiftheyare representingthepetitionersinadditiontothecounselon

35/35

recordandsubmittedthatthepetitionershavepaidthefine.

………”

41.Fromtheabovefactrecordedbythecourtbelow,itisimplicitly clearthattheabovesaidKrishnamoorthy,whohadappearedinthevideo conferenceandplacedsubmissionsonbehalfofthepetitioners,though wasnotthecounselonrecordthereaswell,had,inanefforttoprejudice thelegalcommunityandwithaviewtointerfereintheadministrationof justice,hascastigatedmebycirculatingtheaboveaudioinWhatsapp. Moreover,itistobepointedoutthattheadvocatehadidentifiedhimselfin theaudio. Thewholeaudiowouldspeakvolumesagainstthesaid advocateandhisulteriormotiveincastigatingaJudgefordischarginghis judicialfunctions.Further,Iamalsostatethatifatallanyonehasa grievance,itwouldonlybetheadvocateonrecord,whoappearedforthe petitionerandinthatcase,itwasopentothesaidcounseltoagitatethe matterinamannerknowntolaw.ThesaidKrishnamoorthywasatotal strangertotheproceedings,yethehasmadederogatorystatementsinthe socialmediaagainstmyjudicialfunctions,includingseekingmyrecusal, whichisnothingbutinterferencewiththeadministrationofjustice. If suchanactisnotnippedinthebud,itwillsendawrongsignaltotheother

36/36

personstomakescathingaspersionsagainsttheotherHon’bleJudges, whichwouldimpedethedischargeofthejudicialfunctions.

42.Inthisregard,itisrelevanttobrowsethroughSection2(c)ofthe ContemptofCourtsAct,whichdefines“criminalcontempt”andforbetter appreciation,thesameisquotedhereunder:-

“2………..

(c)“criminalcontempt”meansthepublication(whether bywords,spokenorwritten,orbysigns,orbyvisible representations,orotherwise)ofanymatterorthedoingof anyotheractwhatsoeverwhich-

(i)scandalisesortendstoscandalise,orlowersortends tolowertheauthorityof,anyCourt;or

(ii)prejudices,orinterferesortendstointerferewith,the duecourseofanyjudicialproceeding;or

(iii)interferesortendstointerferewith,orobstructsor tendstoobstruct,theadministrationofjusticeinanyother manner;”

43.OnacarefulreadingoftheprovisionsofSection2(c)ofthe ContemptofCourtsAct,thenecessaryinferencethatfollowsisthatthe aforesaid advocate,Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy,had made scandalous comments,whichhasloweredtheauthorityofthecourtandhadalso

37/37

interferedandprejudicedthecourtproceedingsandalsoobstructedand interferedwiththeadministrationofjustice.Theactoftheaforesaid advocate,Mr.Krishnamoorthy,attracts,intoto,thewholeofSection2(c) andforsuchanact,thisCourtisoftheconsideredviewthattheadvocate Mr.R.Krishnamoorthyshouldbeproceededwithforcriminalcontemptas providedu/s2(c)oftheContemptofCourtsAct.Ifthesaidactofthe advocateislefttogounnoticed,itwouldsendaverywrongsignaltothe entiregeneralpublicthatCourtswouldbeverycircumspectindealingwith issueswhichconcerntheirownbrethren.ThisCourtwouldnotfallprey tosuchactsperpetratedbygossipmongersandunscrupulouselements, withaviewtoscuttlethejudicialprocessandmakethejudiciarydanceto theirtunes.

44.TheHon’bleSupremeCourtinthecaseofR.Muthukrishnan–

Vs-HighCourtofMadras,(2019(16)SCC407)heldasunder:-

“82.Ithasbeenseenfromtimetotimethatvarious attackshavebeenmadeonthejudicialsystem.Ithas becomeverycommontothemembersoftheBartogoto thepress/mediatocriticisetheJudgesinpersonandto commitsheercontemptbyattributingpoliticalcoloursto thejudgments.Itisnothinglessthananactofcontemptof

38/38

gravestform.Wheneveranypoliticalmattercomestothe Courtandisdecided,eitherway,politicalinsinuationsare attributedbyunscrupulouspersons/advocates.Suchacts arenothing,butanactofdenigratingthejudiciaryitselfand destroysthefaithofthecommonmanwhichhereposesin thejudicialsystem.Incaseofgenuinegrievanceagainst anyJudge,theappropriateprocessistolodgeacomplaint tothehigherauthoritiesconcernedwhocantakecareof thesituationanditisimpermissibletomalignthesystem itselfbyattributingpoliticalmotivesandbymakingfalse allegationsagainstthejudicialsystemanditsfunctionaries. Judgeswhoareattackedarenotsupposedtogotopress ormediatoventilatetheirpointofview.”

(EmphasisSupplied)

45.Intheabovestatedscenario,ifthisCourtfailstotakeanyaction againstthesaidindividual,Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy,itwouldhavea cascadingeffectoferodingthefaiththatthegeneralpublichaveonthe justicedeliverysystemandalsopushthejudicialsystemintodoldrums. Insuchabackdrop,thisCourtisoftheopinionthatthisisafitcasewhere thisCourthastoinitiatecriminalcontemptasprovidedu/s14ofthe ContemptofCourtsAct.

39/39

46.Accordingly,theRegistryisdirectedtoissuenoticeregarding initiationofSuoMotuCriminalContemptproceedingsagainstthesaid Mr.R.Krishnamoorthyasprovidedforu/s14oftheContemptofCourtsAct and,thereafter,placethematterbeforetheHon’bleChiefJusticeforbeing listedbeforetheappropriateBenchforhearing.

47.Intheresult,thefollowingordersarepassedinthiscriminal

originalpetition:-

i)Thiscriminaloriginalpetition,insofarasthe1^st

petitionerisconcernedisdismissedforthereasonsaforesaid; ii)Insofarasthe2^ndpetitionerisconcerned,this criminaloriginalpetitionisallowedandthepetitioneris directedtobeenlargedonbailonhersurrenderingbeforethe respondentpolicewithinaperiodof15daysfromthedateof receiptofacopyofthisorderandexecuteapersonalbondfor asumofRs.10,000/-(RupeesTenThousandonly)beforethe respondentpolice; iii)The2^ndrespondent,inconsultationwiththeBar CouncilofIndia,inthelargerinterestofthelegalfraternity, shalllookintotheissueofevolvingamechanismforinitiation ofsuomotuproceedingsagainstsuchofthosemembers, whoindulgeinactivities,whichareprejudicialanddemeaning theinterestofthelegalfraternityasawhole;

40/40

iv)Registryisdirectedtoinitiatesuomotucriminal contemptproceedingsagainstMr.R.Krishnamoorthy, Advocate,SupremeCourtofIndia,No.214,NewLawyers

Chambers,M.C.SetalwadBlock,SupremeCourtofIndia

Campus,NewDelhi110001,byissuingstatutorynotice;

v)Afterissuingstatutorynoticetothesaid

Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy,Registryisdirectedtoplacethematter beforetheHon’bleTheChiefJusticeforlistingthesuomotu criminalcontemptbeforetheappropriateBench.

18.06.2021

Index :Yes

Internet:Yes

GLN

41/41

To

1.ThePublicProsecutor HighCourt,Madras.

2.TheInspectorofPolice

G-7,ChetpetPoliceStation Chennai600031.

3.BarCouncilofTamilNadu Chennai.

4.BarCouncilofIndia NewDelhi.

42/42

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

GLN

PRE-

DELIVERYORDERIN

CRL.O.P.NO.10387

OF2021

Pronouncedon

18.06.2021

43/43