Savukku Shankar’s contempt plea against RS Bharathi: Registry can’t take call on case, says Madras HC

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court made it clear that the maintainability of a contempt of court petition can be decided by the judicial order not by the High Court Registry and directed the Registry to number the contempt petition preferred by 'Savukku' Shankar against DMK organising secretary RS Bharathi.

A division bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam heard the contempt petition moved by the YouTuber 'Savukku' Shankar as the Registry returned the papers to the petitioner. The court cited that the petitioner hadn’t produced a consent order from the Advocate General (AG) to initiate criminal contempt proceedings.

Senior counsel V Raghavachari, on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that as per section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, the maintainability of the plea could be decided by the High Court; the Registry cannot take the role of the judicial heads, he contended. The counsel vehemently objected to the Registry's decision to return the papers.

Advocate Richardson Wilson, appearing for RS Bharathi, submitted that the law has already been settled that if the AG's consent is not obtained, the only resort is for the court to initiate the case suo motu.

After hearing the submissions, observed that even if the petition is rejected by the court, it can initiate a suo motu plea, if the court arrives at the opinion that it is a fit case for criminal contempt. The Registry need not return the papers merely on the ground that the consent of the AG has not obtained, it is the court to decide the issue of maintainability, observed the bench. The bench directed the Registry to number the petition to decide the maintainability of the contempt petition.

'Savukku' Shankar filed criminal contempt against RS Bharathi for his comments on Justice N Anand Venkatesh claiming the judge is adopting a 'pick and choose policy' in initiating the suo motu action against ministers and also attributed malafide intentions while addressing the media, said 'Savukku' Shankar. He also contended that Bharathi's comments had caused damage to the credibility of the judiciary in the eyes of the public and sought strict action against him under the Contempt of Courts Act.

The then AG R Shunmugasundaram refused to grant consent to the application to initiate proceedings for criminal contempt against Bharathi.