Man who accused Madras High Court judge of genocide held guilty of contempt of court

The Madras High Court recently held a litigant guilty of contempt of court for accusing a judge of genocide and making other scandalous remarks against judges of the Court [High Court of Madras v. T Ashok Surana].. A Bench of Justices P Velmurugan and M Jothiraman observed that instead of expressing any regret, the litigant, T Ashok Surana, had persisted with such remarks and even demanded an apology from judges.The Court proceeded to declare him guilty of contempt of court. However, it has also given Surana one last chance to purge himself of the contempt by filing an affidavit of apology, which must reflect genuine regret.If such an affidavit is not filed by March 9, when the case is listed next, the Court said it would impose a penalty on Surana for contempt of court, which could also extend to a one-month jail sentence..The matter is tied to a 2019 hearing of a writ petition filed in 2017 by Surana. A Division Bench with now retired Justice PN Prakash had posted the matter for dismissal after Surana, who wish to appear as a party in person, failed to appear in court for multiple hearings.After not appearing in two successive hearings, Surana is said to have appeared in Court on November 12, 2019, only to demand that the Bench recuse as Justice Prakash "has committed genocide and crime against humanity on a scale unknown to mankind."The Bench dismissed Surana's plea but brought the incident to the then-Chief Justice's notice so that contempt proceedings may be initiated against Surana for his comments against the judges. A suo motu contempt case was registered against Surana in 2020 on the Chief Justice's orders and the matter was eventually listed before the Bench of Justices Velmurugan and Jothiraman. This Division Bench framed contempt of court charges against Surana in June last year..In the latest order, the Bench noted that despite giving Surana several opportunities to apologise for his conduct and purge himself of contempt, the litigant has remained defiant. "The contemnor (Surana) has not shown any inclination to withdraw such statements. On the contrary, he has reiterated these allegations in his reply statement and has taken a stand calling upon the Division Bench to tender an unconditional apology to him, withdraw the contempt proceedings and recuse from hearing any matter in which he is a party. The tenor of the reply statement is wholly inappropriate and reflects a continued attempt to scandalise the institution and interfere with the due course of judicial proceedings," the February 10 order further noted..Surana's reply in the matter stated that the present Division Bench was also disqualified from hearing the contempt case against him and are "stripped" of their powers under the Constitution.The reply, reproduced in the Court's order, added that the only "escape route" for the judges was if Surana were to give them an opportunity to withdraw the contempt notice and if they gave him an "unabashed apology", apart from compensating him and recusing from hearing any case to which he is a party in future. The Court noted that Surana has resorted to similar "tactics" in the past as well, with over 20 judges of the High Court to ensure that they recuse from hearing matters in which he is a party.The Court held that such repeated intemperate and unwarranted remarks against judges scandalises the court and interferes with judicial proceedings."This Court is therefore satisfied that the charges framed against the contemnor stand proved and that he has committed contempt of Court," it held..Nevertheless, the Court said that Surana has one more chance to correct his course by submitting an apology by the time the case is heard next."It is made clear that the apology shall be unconditional and reflect genuine regret. In the event the contemnor fails to file such affidavit within the time granted, this Court shall proceed to impose appropriate punishment under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, including sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one month, without further reference," it said..[Read Order].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.