William Shakespeare said, “You can have the powers of giant. But it does not behove  the giant,  to exercise it”. The higher you go, the more merciful and forgiving,  one ought to become. But embracing mercy or forgiveness, as faculties does not come easy. And it is not proof of expression of weakness but strength, as my friend Vasudevan Parthiban – who happens to be Justice V Parthiban,to be politically correct,said in his recent verdict  in Contempt Proceedings arising out of WP No. 17578 of 2020.

It is not the order or magnanimous closure of the contempt proceedings that appeals to the discerning. It is the wordplay and nobility in intent and substance. Words have consequences. The top court has always counselled sobriety for constitutional courts,  while dealing with subordinate judiciary or the bureaucracy. The learned judge has adroitly followed the papal message.

For those who had followed the hearings, on the Virtual Platform, and yours truly religiously did, it would seem a pivoting and turnaround,  to see the officer in contumacious conduct of the brazen garden variety,  go scot free. During the hearings,  the learned judge was furious and his choice of words were strident. There was no  discernible conviction in the expressed contrition of the contemner, Judge openly said. Instead of a scalpel, a sledgehammer,  one rightly assumed,was coming.

Instead this came. This one sentence captures the man and the judge.

     “ A judge of the Constitutional Court is not personally being offended by any contumacious conduct of the officials but as a constitutional personage he represents the institution as a whole and its esteem and prestige.”

Superficially,to the uninformed, and the officer in the dock, doomsday was inevitable and deservedly too. The body language of the learned judge allied with the ‘anger in the verbiage’ as Lord Byron (a poet  and not a Law Lord , who was called mad, bad and dangerous,  during his times) was   associated with, suggested that the goose of the officer was well  and truly cooked and it was a forgone conclusion, waiting for the fat lady to sing,  when curtains were downed,  with the final verdict.

Justice Parthiban (he deserves a J this time) proved to be a different kettle of fish. Well above the run of the mill and ordinary. He rose along with the majesty of the institution when he said :

               “ The smooth flow of administration of justice may on occasions confront challenges by the erring conduct of egotistical officials, but the justice delivery system ought to ignore such attempts of derailment of its supremacy in terms of the constitutional scheme. The dignity and the esteem of the Courts stand enhanced more by restrained use of the power than by unleashing it at every instance of perceived transgression. The ultimate measure of the institution is what it does with its power. It is easier to handout punishment for contempt, but it is always gracious as an institution to observe solemn sobriety and majestically overlook periodical derisive aberrations and march ahead unhindered allowing the defiant traits to fall by the wayside. As Gandhiji said, “forgiveness is the attribute of the strong”.”

Captivatingly mused, my friend.

Judiciary is often accused of indulging in overreach. And being overly sensitive to the chairs they sit on. Here is one example shining bright,  when the contemner is put in a corner like the mischievous cartoon character- Dennis The Menace-by his mother,only to be disciplined and not punished.

The status of the institution is elevated by such grace, even when the court is evidently not convinced with the expression of purported remorse for it rang as born

“ not out of self-belief, but because of compulsion, yet such insincere, shallow apology is fair enough to be a reason for closure of the contempt petition”.

This is judicial majesty at its brilliant best, for sentencing him for contempt would have been de rigueur.

And the closure is sheer class. Sending a loud message that such officials would do well,  to read the writing on the wall and behave. Not trifle with the orders of the court.

“The Contempt Petition is closed with a caution that forgiveness may be the attribute of the strong, but it is certainly not to be construed as an institutional weakness.

“A wise Judge may let mercy temper justice, but may not let mercy undo it.”

 – Lewis B.Smedes

Excuse me, just who was this Lewis. For the uninitiated – Lewis Benedictus Smedes was a renowned Christian author, ethicist, and theologian in the Reformed tradition. He was a professor of theology and ethics for twenty-five years at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California.And he was the author of the work, appropriately named “ The Art of Forgiving- When You Need to Forgive and Don’t Know How”. A perfect choice for the fitting quote.

Now, you may know. A lovely poetic touch to add muscle to the integrity of the institution,even while not exercising the strength in the sinews. Would the message go home? Well done, my friend.

(Author is practising advocate in the Madras High Court)