Some contempt cases.
In 1968, Kerala CM and Marxist leader EMS attacked judiciary by saying "judges are guided by class prejudice and serve the interests of ruling class and are weighted against the working class".
The SC judgment finding it contemptuous is quite strange.(1/n)
In 1968, Kerala CM and Marxist leader EMS attacked judiciary by saying "judges are guided by class prejudice and serve the interests of ruling class and are weighted against the working class".
The SC judgment finding it contemptuous is quite strange.(1/n)
J Hidayatullah devotes most of the judgment to explain what is Marxism and how EMS has misunderstood it. Marx never spoke against judiciary, judge said. The judge laboured a lot to state how EMS is ignorant of true Marxism, and that his statements were not based...(2/n)
...on true understanding of Communism. That seemed to be basis for conviction! He was imposed a fine of Rs 50.
In 2015, another Marxist leader, MV Jayarajan was convicted for contempt for calling two HC judges "fools". Jayarajan's comments were in response to HC banning..(3/n)
In 2015, another Marxist leader, MV Jayarajan was convicted for contempt for calling two HC judges "fools". Jayarajan's comments were in response to HC banning..(3/n)
..public demonstrations and protests. Even there also, the SC did not have much objection with Jayarajan saying that judges are "living in glass houses" and that their "judgments have value of grass". But the Court couldn't condone him calling judges "fools". He was awarded.(4/n)
...4 weeks jail. The Court said that such comments addressed to a 'rustic, illiterate' crowd could incite feelings against judiciary.
In 1988, P Shivashankar, then Union Law Minister, was faced with contempt case over his remarks that judiciary was elitist & protective...(5/n)
In 1988, P Shivashankar, then Union Law Minister, was faced with contempt case over his remarks that judiciary was elitist & protective...(5/n)
..of Zamindari interests.His comments were in the context of land reforms judgments interpreting Article 31, privy purse judgment etc. He was addressing a meeting at the Bar Council...(6/n)
..SC felt that the statements were part of fair criticism, though added that some harsh comments were avoidable.
In 2002, writer Arundhathi Roy was punished for contempt for her article against Narmada judgment. Apart from the the original article, the Court also found...(7/n)
In 2002, writer Arundhathi Roy was punished for contempt for her article against Narmada judgment. Apart from the the original article, the Court also found...(7/n)
...her counter affidavit to be offensive. To not apply the maganinimity shown in P Shivashankar case - who was a law minister - the Court observed that Roy was not studied in law & not familiar with workings of Court. She was sentenced to 1 day imprisonment and 2000 rs fine(8/n)
Before ending, a quote from P Shiva shankar judgment
"In a democracy, judges and courts are subject to criticism, and if any reasonable argument or criticism in respectful language and tempered with moderation...(9/n)
"In a democracy, judges and courts are subject to criticism, and if any reasonable argument or criticism in respectful language and tempered with moderation...(9/n)
.. is offered against any judgment as contrary to law or public good, no court would treat criticism as contempt of court" (10/n)
