Madras High Court: In a suo motu contempt proceeding initiated under Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, pursuant to the High Court’s order dated 04-04-2025, the Single Judge Bench of P.T. Asha, J., observed that the Contemnors were unaware of the contents of the affidavit filed in their name and had tendered unconditional apologies. In light of this, the Court held that they had purged themselves of contempt.
However, the Court came down strongly on their counsel for obstructing the execution of the non-bailable warrants issued against his clients. The Court directed the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to initiate appropriate action against him and also instructed the police to take steps in accordance with law for his interference in the discharge of official duties.
As directed by this Court on 04-06-2025, the non-bailable warrant was executed, and the Contemnors were produced before this Court by the Police. The Inspector of Police filed an affidavit, wherein he stated that although they had complied with the non-bailable warrant issued by this Court by securing the Contemnors and bringing them to the Court for production, they were unable to produce them before this Court on 18-06-2025 due to the actions of the counsel who had appeared for the petitioners.
Therefore, from a mere reading of the above affidavit, the Court observed that the counsel had prevented a Government servant/Police official from discharging his official duties.
The Court also noted that it was evident the contents of the affidavit had been scripted by the counsel, which made the matter all the more shocking to the Court, particularly considering the language used—not only against the Judicial Officer of the Labour Court but also against the Judges of this Court.
Considering the fact that a member of this noble profession had acted in a manner that brought disrepute to the legal fraternity, the Court directed the Standing Counsel for the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, to take necessary steps to initiate appropriate proceedings against the Advocate for the aforesaid misconduct.
Furthermore, the Court recorded that the Advocate once again abused and cursed the Court during the hearing. This incident was documented, and a copy of the same recording was attached to the order in a USB drive. The Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) also provided a copy of the recording to the Court.
The Court issued the following directions:
- The Non-Bailable Warrant issued on 04-06-2025 was recalled.
- The Registrar General of the Madras High Court was directed to forward a copy of this order, along with the affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to initiate appropriate action against the Advocate.
-
The Inspector of Police was directed to file a complaint and initiate action against the Advocate, for preventing a public servant from discharging official duties and obstructing the production of the Contemnors before the Court on 18-06-2025.
Upon examining the Contemnors, the Court found that they were unaware of the contents of the affidavit and had tendered unconditional apologies. In view of this, and since the affidavit’s contents were unknown to them, the Court held that they had purged themselves of contempt.
Accordingly, the Contempt Petition was closed, and sub-application was allowed.
[High Court of Madras v. Krishnaveni, Cont.P.No.1248 of 2025 and Sub Appln(OS)No.703 of 2025, decided on 20-06-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Petitioner: Mr.V.Chandrasekaran
For Respondents: Mr.S.Sugendran, Additional Public Prosecutor
