IN RE: P. DHARMARAJ AND ORS. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is said that Judges and Lawyers are the two wheels of the Chariot of Justice Delivery System - a Chariot meant for the litigants and public at large. The unfortunate continued actions of the Madurai Bar Association in bringing this Chariot to a standstill and seeking to destroy the other wheel left no option, but to repair the Chariot of the Justice Delivery System. The result has been the unpleasant task of initiation of the contempt proceedings.

(2.) A reading of the orders passed in these contempt proceedings leave no manner of doubt of the pain and anguish expressed by the Division Bench over the resolutions passed by the Madurai Bar Association as well as its conduct. It is not necessary to deal in extenso with all those aspects, so far as the issue of the present reference is concerned, as that would be a matter to be determined in pursuance to the notice issued in the contempt proceedings. There was prima facie aggravated conduct on the part of the contemners by seeking to overawes the lawyers and cause disruption even in the contempt proceedings. The anguish is expressed by one of the Judges (S. Tamilvanan, J.) in a detailed order passed by him on 30.09.2015, in which various concerns have been expressed. It has been opined that number of larger issues arise for consideration, apart from the issue of contempt, and the matter should not be left to suo-motu contempt proceedings. Various contempt proceedings had even been initiated earlier against the lawyers. But in the present case the difference is stated to be the reports which showed that the advocates were calling for boycott of courts, conducting processions against a judicial order and continue to do so. The added aggravation was raising defamatory allegations against the Judges, and the police officials had unreasonable hesitation and failed to prevent the same on several occasions, even at the court premises.

(3.) The learned Judge was of the view that proper guidelines need to be given to prevent the illegal activity of advocates boycotting the Courts and taking out processions inside the Court premises, as well as in other premises, and thus a Larger Bench headed by the Chief Justice may be appropriate. Vital issues of providing proper security arrangements by CISF or any other Central Force had to be decided and the decision of the Chief Justice, in this behalf, would be paramount to give full stop to the illegal boycotting of Courts and such other activities. Such a Larger Bench could also decide the issue of contempt and issue proper guidelines.