T NARAYANAN NAMBIAR Vs. M SANKARAN NAMBOODIRIPAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the 9th November 1967, the respondent, who is the Chief Minister of this State, held a press conference, and a report of what he said at that conference appeared in the issue of the "Indian Express" of the 10th November as also in other newspapers. The report that appeared in the "Indian Express" has been referred to in the memorandum of charges served on the respondent as Ext. P1; and, in the counter-affidavit filed by him, the respondent has stated that report is substantially correct though incomplete in some respects. The following is the relevant portion of the report:

(2.) WHEN questioned the commencement of the hearing, the respondent denied the charge and stated that he had nothing to add to the counter-affidavit he had already filed after reading the copies of the petition, the affidavit, and the memorandum of charges earlier served upon him, and after fully understanding what the charge against him was.

(3.) IT is difficult to make a summary of the counter-affidavit, and, for the rest, I think that it should suffice to say that the respondent asserts that his statement was only "a fair criticism of the system of judicial administration with a view to making it conform to our people's cherished objective of a really democratic, egalitarian society moving along the path of socialism." IT was made by him out of a sense of duty as a political worker, as a legislator of standing, as the leader of the legislature of the State in order to educate public opinion and reform the administration. There is no aspersion cast on any particular judgment or any particular judge and for these reasons the statement cannot amount to contempt of court. IT does not offend the majesty of the law or undermine the dignity of the courts. IT does not obstruct or tend to obstruct the flow of the stream of justice. IT has not the tendency to lower the authority, dignity or prestige of the courts in the discharge of their duties and in the administration of justice and does not scandalise the judiciary of this State or of the rest of India.