Virtual Courts
Virtual Courts
Litigation News

"Even an uneducated village man will not utter the said filthy language", Advocate fined Rs. 200 for cursing during virtual hearing

It is reported that the lawyer had hurled insulting words during a court hearing towards the driver of a speeding car. The Court remarked "an Advocate with 30 years of experience" would never utter such insulting words.

Meera Emmanuel

A lawyer, who reportedly hurled verbal abuses at a speeding car, while attending a video conference hearing before the Principal District and Sessions Court, Thoothukudi was recently awarded a Rs 200 fine for the lapse in courtroom decorum (The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi v. Thiru G Samwell Rajendran).

To this end, District and Sessions judge N Logeswaran invoked Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code (intentional insult or interruption to public servant sitting in judicial proceeding) read with Section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Procedure in certain cases of contempt) against Advocate G Samwell Rajendran.

“The court is of the view that even an uneducated Village man will not utter the above said filthy language in a public place and the uncivilised, offensive, intimidatory words used by Advocate Mr Samwell Rajendran clearly shows that he has prima facie committed the offence in the Judicial proceedings.”
Judge N Logeswaran

The incident is stated to have happened on June 8 in a hearing presided over by Judge Logeswaran.

As recorded in the order passed the following day, the sudden utterance of the verbal abuse by Advocate Rajendran was witnessed by the Public Prosecutor, Stenographer, Protocol Officer and the System Analyst present.

Written reports over the same were given from these persons, except the Public Prosecutor. After the day's hearing, the Court was also told that Advocate Rajendran had emailed the Tamil Nadu Bar Council stating that he was an experienced advocate with over 30 years practice and adding that the occurrence did not happen.

The Court, however, proceeded to remark that,

“On the face of the utterance of filthy language used by the Contemnor, this court is of the view an Advocate with 30 years of experience in the Judicial Proceedings would never utter such insulting words.”

Judge Logeswaran went on to opine that the explanation given by Advocate Rajendran in reply to the Court's show-cause notice was not satisfactory and that the words uttered by him constituted an intentional insult in the course of judicial proceedings and an insult to the judge.

Therefore, the Court ordered Advocate Rajendran to pay up the Rs 200 fine, failing which he would have had to undergo 1-month prison time.

Read the order:

The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Thoothukudi v. Thiru G Samwell Rajendran - June 9 order.pdf
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news