Contempt for frivolous cases against Azim Premji: Supreme Court issues directions for proceedings before Karnataka HC

The Supreme Court on Thursday issued directions to ensure the speedy disposal of contempt proceedings against non-governmental organization (NGO) India Awake for Transparency before the Karnataka High Court for filing frivolous cases against Wipro Chairman Azim Premji (Azim Hasham Premji and Another v. India Awake for Transparency and Others)..While expressing concern over techniques adopted by the NGO to delay the proceedings of the contempt case before the High Court by filing multiple petitions against Premji, a Division Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh observed:"It appears that there is undoubtedly an endeavour to obfuscate proceedings before the Karnataka High Court and the matter is being dragged on unnecessarily to prevent the culmination of the same. Interlocutory applications are being filed for splitting proceedings, postponement of filing of replies, assailing sanction granted by the Advocate General and so on.".Moreover, the Court took note of the NGO's endeavours to delay court proceedings. The Court noted that on October 21 this year, the NGO sought an adjournment to clear office objections on interlocutory applications (IAs). On October 29, the NGO again sought adjournment to clear office objections on another IA, even though that application was stated to have been rendered infructuous.On November 12, the Supreme Court had expressed its exasperation at the NGO for not permitting proceedings to go on. On November 19, the NGO argued an application for recall of the notice of contempt for more than one and a half hours and then sought leave to withdraw the same.The Court was thus of the view:"In normal circumstances, it is not for us to lay down as to how the High Court should proceed with the matter but the manner in which these proceedings have gone on disturbs us.".Remarking it as an 'unusual practice', the Court went on to lay down norms to followed by both the parties before the Karnataka High Court so that the proceedings come to an end:No further applications will be entertained as interlocutory applications by the Karnataka High Court in the contempt proceedings. If there are still some IAs lying under objections, it will be the responsibility of the respondent to get them cleared and listed on the next date failing which they will stand as dismissed for non-prosecution. In our view, there is no question of agitating the issue of hearing before consent being granted by the Advocate General for initiation of contempt proceedings and this is clearly an obfuscation of the issue seeking to rely on practices of different Courts. Both the parties will be granted half an hour each to make their oral submissions in the matter at hand and can file a short synopsis running into not more than three pages each. It is time the Courts put a time limit to oral submissions. In the present factual scenario which is based on orders passed by Courts from time to time, there is no question of claiming trial in the proceedings. The contempt proceedings would stand concluded in the aforesaid terms and it is for the Karnataka High Court to then take a call on the merits of the matter on which we are not commenting..The matter will be next heard on January 11, 2022 for further directions..Senior Advocate S Ganesh along with Advocate-on-Record EC Agrawala and Advocates Mahesh Agarwal, Rishi Agrawala, Himanshu Satija and Aarushi Tiku appeared for Premji.Advocate R Subramanian and Advocate-on-Record Shruti Agarwal appeared for the NGO..On February 12 this year, the Karnataka High Court had imposed costs of ₹10 lakh on the NGO for filing multiple petitions on the very same cause of action, seeking to register a case against Premji and others.The Bench of Justice PS Dinesh Kumar had noted that multiple petitions were moved before the High Court seeking criminal action against the Wipro Chairman, and that even after those petitions were dismissed, the NGO filed a fresh writ petition with similar set of allegations. While rejecting the writ petition, the Court noted:"...there remains no doubt that petitioner is indulging in forum shopping on the very same cause of action. As held in Udyami this amounts to criminal contempt as the core issue in all these writ petitions is one and the same… In the result, this writ petition is not only devoid of merits, but an absolute abuse of process of law. Though petitioner was forewarned, he chose to argue this writ petition as a stand-alone petition wasting the valuable time of this Court to deal with such frivolous cases. Therefore, imposition of punitive cost is necessary.".[Read Order of Supreme Court]