Summary
Justice C.S. Karnan was held guilty of grave contempt and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. Unsupported public allegations and purported retaliatory judicial orders, including after directions withholding judicial work, undermined administration of justice. The accompanying reasons confined the publicity restraint to further statements by him while preserving public debate on the episode.
Issues
- What conclusions and punishment followed from the established contempt conduct.
- What was the scope of the restraint on publication of further statements.
Provisions considered
- Article 129, Constitution of IndiaThe Court’s contempt jurisdiction supported punishment for conduct scandalising the court and obstructing its proceedings. (¶ Chelameswar J: 18–25)
- Section 2(c), Contempt of Courts Act, 1971The concurring reasons treated the post-notice conduct as both scandalising the court and interference with its proceedings. (¶ Chelameswar J: 21–25)
Held
- The principal reasons found unsupported malicious allegations, wide dissemination and purported orders against the Bench despite express restraints. The conduct constituted grave contempt, including contempt in the Court’s face. (¶ Khehar CJI: 30–36)
- The restraint against publicising further statements by the contemnor did not prohibit public debate, academic or otherwise, on the matter. (¶ Khehar CJI: 35)
- The concurring reasons stressed careful use of contempt power and distinguished bona fide criticism from the extreme post-notice conduct obstructing adjudication here. Suggestions about appointment assessment and alternative judicial corrective mechanisms were calls for debate, not new operative institutional rules. (¶¶ Chelameswar J: 20, Chelameswar J: 25–30)
Result
Contempt petition disposed of; Justice C.S. Karnan sentenced to six months’ imprisonment.