w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



High Court of Madras v/s Paulraj


Company & Directors' Information:- A B T MADRAS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U50101TZ2002PTC010090

Company & Directors' Information:- D P S MADRAS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74210TN1986PTC012702

Company & Directors' Information:- C V & CO (MADRAS) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999TN1972PTC006161

    Suo Motu Contempt Petition No. 120 of 2020

    Decided On, 17 September 2021

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH & THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

    For the Petitioner: V. Vijay Shankar, Advocate. For the Respondent: M. Selvam, Advocate.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: Suo Motu Contempt Petition proceedings initiated as per order dated 23.10.2019 passed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice in R.O.C.No.18431/2019/B3 (Complaint Cell).)P.N. Prakash, J.1. Paulraj, S/o.Subbia, the alleged contemnor herein, was a defendant in O.S.No.125 of 2008 and a plaintiff in O.S.No.245 of 2008, both on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ambattur. While so, on 06.02.2019, it is alleged that Paulraj had circulated handbills in Tamil, making scandalous and derogatory allegations on the learned District Munsif, Ambattur. On the report dated 06.02.2019 that was submitted by the learned District Munsif, Ambattur to the Registrar General of this Court, through the Principal District Judge, Tiruvallur, action for criminal contempt was initiated against Paulraj and the present Suo Motu Contempt Petition was registered.2. Statutory notice was issued to Paulraj and on his appearance, the following charge was framed against him on 24.08.2021:That, you, Paulraj, S/o.Subbia, defendant in O.S.No.125 of 2008 and plaintiff in O.S.No.245 of 2008 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Ambattur, printed and circulated handbills (copy furnished to you) on 06.02.2019 in and around the Court of the District Munsif, Ambattur, making scandalous and derogatory allegations on the said Judicial Officer and thereby, you are charged for the above said act, under Sections 2(c)(i) and 2(c)(iii) which are punishable under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.What do you say ?”3. On 24.08.2021, when Paulraj was questioned, he submitted that he printed the handbills, but, did not circulate them to all and sundry in the Court campus, but, only handed it over to the Judicial Officer. On the same day, he also profusely apologised for having done that and also filed an affidavit, wherein, he has stated as follows :... ... Only in disturbed mind I committed the said mistake and I further submit that now I realise my mistake and committed mistake before the Hon’ble District Munsif Court, Ambattur. Now, I tender unconditional apology before this Hon’ble Court for the mistake I committed. I further submit that I tendering the unconditional apology before this Hon’ble Court after realising the mistake committed. ... ...”4. Mr.Selvam, learned counsel for Paulraj submitted that Paulraj appeared before the said Judicial Officer, who is now posted as XVII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, on 27.08.2021 and filed an affidavit of apology, regretting his action and seeking his pardon, besides publishing a public apology in a vernacular newspaper “Makkal Kural”on 04.09.2021.5. We carefully considered the above. The fact remains that the impugned handbill against the Judicial Officer is per se scandalous and derogatory. Paulraj has not denied the issuance of the same, but, has only placed before us, the circumstance under which he had done that. Judges of the subordinate judiciary are being targeted by disgruntled litigants frequently. They need to be protected by the High Court against such onslaughts.6. In such perspective of the matter, Paulraj is convicted for the charges under Sections 2(c)(i) and 2(c)(iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which are punishable under Section 12, ibid.7. As regards the sentence, bearing in mind his subsequent remorse, we impose a fine of Rs.500/- fo

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

r each charge (Rs.1000/- in toto), in default to undergo one week simple imprisonment for each charge. The fine amount shall be remitted to the Registry within four weeks from today, failing which, the Registry shall take appropriate steps to commit him to prison for undergoing the default sentence.In the result, this contempt petition is disposed of on the above terms.
O R