“If you have guts, take action against me.”.These were the words uttered to a Division Bench of the Madras High Court by Madurai-based advocate W Peter Ramesh Kumar..And action has been taken..A Bench of V Ramasubramanian and K Ravichandrababu JJ. yesterday sentenced Kumar to six months in prison and a fine of Rs. 2000 in light of his despicable behaviour..The events are related to the boycott witnessed by the High Court on September 16 last year, which prompted Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul to call for CISF security on the campus..On that day, Kumar and a group of advocates barged into the court room of Justices R Sudhakar and VM Velumani shouting slogans and calling out the advocates present to support the boycott organised by the Madurai Bench High Court Advocates Association, an organisation which, ironically, Kumar is not even a member of..To make matters worse, he began arguing with a lawyer who was present in the court room who refused to come out, before daring the judges present to take action against him..The Division Bench, on the same day, proceeded to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against Kumar, after which he was afforded an opportunity to file a reply. Things would have turned out much better for the advocate had he chosen to exhibit a modicum of regret over his actions..On the contrary, Kumar, in his reply, proceeded to make “scandalous allegations” against the high court judges, demanded the summoning of a sitting Supreme Court judge to vouch for him and for some reason, made adverse remarks against women lawyers. He then found it appropriate to circulate this counter through WhatsApp messages and Facebook posts..It was also contended in his reply that filing these proceedings would amount to double jeopardy, as he was already been suspended, along with 14 other advocates by the Bar Council of India. However, the court, relying on a number of judgements held,.“Merely because the Bar Council is seized of a matter and exercised its power of disciplinary action, it does not take away the power of the court to proceed with a contempt action.”.And this is not the first time contempt proceedings have been initiated against Kumar. In the order dated September 16, the court noted that he had been involved in two such instances previously. In 2013, he was found guilty of contempt and placed under probation for a year. Before that, in 2010, he was taken to task under similar circumstances. The September 16 order states,.“In fact, the behaviour of the contemnor has grown from bad to worse, whenever the contempt was listed. Even when we were dictating orders today, he kept on interrupting.”.In the order passed yesterday, the court noted that they had displayed a tolerance towards boycotts and protests made by lawyers, even though it has been outlawed by a number of Supreme Court judgments..“We are fully aware that the Bar never abides by the series of Judgments given by the Supreme Court and by this Court on the issue of court boycott.”.However, the contemnor’s belligerence, was in the eyes of the court “unpardonable”, and they were left with no option but to award the sentence and the fine..“The Contemnor did not show any remorse or regret for his conduct. He did not come forward to tender any apology for his indefensible conduct…did not come forward with any reasonable defense in the course of the two statements dated 27.1.2016 and 15.2.2016 filed by him before this Court.”.The court has, however, suspended the sentence for 15 days on its own, in light of the fact that the contemnor can prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court, provided he pays the fine within a week. Given the circumstances of the case, it is not likely that the apex court will look favourably upon the appellant..Read the order:.Image source: Kumar’s Facebook page
“If you have guts, take action against me.”.These were the words uttered to a Division Bench of the Madras High Court by Madurai-based advocate W Peter Ramesh Kumar..And action has been taken..A Bench of V Ramasubramanian and K Ravichandrababu JJ. yesterday sentenced Kumar to six months in prison and a fine of Rs. 2000 in light of his despicable behaviour..The events are related to the boycott witnessed by the High Court on September 16 last year, which prompted Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul to call for CISF security on the campus..On that day, Kumar and a group of advocates barged into the court room of Justices R Sudhakar and VM Velumani shouting slogans and calling out the advocates present to support the boycott organised by the Madurai Bench High Court Advocates Association, an organisation which, ironically, Kumar is not even a member of..To make matters worse, he began arguing with a lawyer who was present in the court room who refused to come out, before daring the judges present to take action against him..The Division Bench, on the same day, proceeded to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against Kumar, after which he was afforded an opportunity to file a reply. Things would have turned out much better for the advocate had he chosen to exhibit a modicum of regret over his actions..On the contrary, Kumar, in his reply, proceeded to make “scandalous allegations” against the high court judges, demanded the summoning of a sitting Supreme Court judge to vouch for him and for some reason, made adverse remarks against women lawyers. He then found it appropriate to circulate this counter through WhatsApp messages and Facebook posts..It was also contended in his reply that filing these proceedings would amount to double jeopardy, as he was already been suspended, along with 14 other advocates by the Bar Council of India. However, the court, relying on a number of judgements held,.“Merely because the Bar Council is seized of a matter and exercised its power of disciplinary action, it does not take away the power of the court to proceed with a contempt action.”.And this is not the first time contempt proceedings have been initiated against Kumar. In the order dated September 16, the court noted that he had been involved in two such instances previously. In 2013, he was found guilty of contempt and placed under probation for a year. Before that, in 2010, he was taken to task under similar circumstances. The September 16 order states,.“In fact, the behaviour of the contemnor has grown from bad to worse, whenever the contempt was listed. Even when we were dictating orders today, he kept on interrupting.”.In the order passed yesterday, the court noted that they had displayed a tolerance towards boycotts and protests made by lawyers, even though it has been outlawed by a number of Supreme Court judgments..“We are fully aware that the Bar never abides by the series of Judgments given by the Supreme Court and by this Court on the issue of court boycott.”.However, the contemnor’s belligerence, was in the eyes of the court “unpardonable”, and they were left with no option but to award the sentence and the fine..“The Contemnor did not show any remorse or regret for his conduct. He did not come forward to tender any apology for his indefensible conduct…did not come forward with any reasonable defense in the course of the two statements dated 27.1.2016 and 15.2.2016 filed by him before this Court.”.The court has, however, suspended the sentence for 15 days on its own, in light of the fact that the contemnor can prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court, provided he pays the fine within a week. Given the circumstances of the case, it is not likely that the apex court will look favourably upon the appellant..Read the order:.Image source: Kumar’s Facebook page
