Petitioner gets six-month jail term

By Our Special Correspondent

CHENNAI, MARCH 7. A person, who filed petitions before the Madras High Court making scandalous allegations against three Judges and sought over Rs.1000 crores as compensation, has been sentenced to six months imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs.2,000 each for four counts of committing contempt of court.

Finding the petitioner guilty of committing contempt, Mr.Justice R. Balasubramanian, said the four sentences would run consecutively. He said the applicant deserved no sympathy. He dismissed the four applications containing the allegations as not maintainable.

Originally, Mr. Kalyanaraman, who works with the Income Tax Department, had initiated four criminal defamation proceedings in the magistrate courts against several persons, including his colleagues. The respondents in the proceedings moved the High Court by revision. Three Judges (one of them demitted office recently) disposed of the revisions on merits. All the orders went against Mr. Kalyanaraman.

Aggrieved he moved the High Court by filing four criminal original petitions against the revision orders. He named the three Judges as the first respondent in each petition. They also contained motivated allegations against the three Judges stating that the orders had been passed by fraud and in collusion with the other respondents. The orders were corrupt, he contended and sought a compensation of Rs.1000 crores and from each of the Judge for passing orders against him.

The applications, before being numbered, were posted for maintainability before Mr. Justice Balasubramanian, who after perusing the allegations initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against Mr. Kalyanaraman. The contemnor justified his stance stating that he was making the allegations only against the Judges and they were not meant to scandalise the court. The Judge rejected the contentions in the light of the recent Supreme Court judgment in the `S.K. Sundaram case'.

He held that the averments were libelous allegations against sitting and retired Judges. If the contemnor was aggrieved over the order of the Judges, he could have appealed before the Supreme Court or go by the orders. Yet he had no right to attack the order in the manner that was done now. The averments would have the effect of scandalising the court. By making such reckless allegations, the contemnor was definitely destroying public confidence in the judiciary.

When the court repeatedly asked him as to whether he stood by the allegations, he repeated that he had a right to make those allegations and believed in making those allegations.

Hence, the Judge awarded the four sentences against Mr. Kalyanaraman. However, he suspended the sentences for 30 days to enable him to go on appeal, if required.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : Surjeet threatens to sue Murasoli
Next     : Eye hospital's gesture to quake victims