IN RE: S.K. SUNDARAM versus -

IN RE: S.K. SUNDARAM versus -

Sending a telegram with scandalising content and appending it to a criminal complaint amounts to criminal contempt as per Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, regardless of publication; the acts demonstrated clear lack of bona fide as the President had conclusively determined the CJI's age, and the act scandalised and lowered the authority of the Supreme Court of India.

Parties
Contemnor: S.K. Sundaram; Chief Justice of India: Dr. Justice A.S. Anand; Amicus/solicitor General of India: Harish N. Salve
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Suo Motu Contempt Petition (crl) No. 5 of 2000 / Final Decision
Outcome
Contemnor held guilty, convicted and sentenced to six months imprisonment; sentence suspended for one month with provision to suspend for five years if undertaking given; otherwise, sentence to be served.
Legal Topics
Criminal Contempt of Court, Scandalising the Court, Publication by Telegram, Good Faith in Criminal Law
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Judicial Administration Criminal Contempt of Court Scandalising the Court Publication by Telegram Good Faith in Criminal Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

S.K. Sundaram

Contemnor

Dr. Justice A.S. Anand

Chief Justice of India

Harish N. Salve

Amicus/solicitor General of India

Procedural Posture

Suo Motu Contempt Petition (crl) No. 5 of 2000 / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sending a telegram with scandalising content amounts to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
  2. 2 Whether attaching the telegram to a criminal complaint constitutes 'publication'.
  3. 3 Whether the Contemnor acted in good faith.

Ratio Decidendi

Sending a telegram with scandalising content and appending it to a criminal complaint amounts to criminal contempt as per Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, regardless of publication; the acts demonstrated clear lack of bona fide as the President had conclusively determined the CJI's age, and the act scandalised and lowered the authority of the Supreme Court of India.

Court Disposition

Contemnor held guilty, convicted and sentenced to six months imprisonment; sentence suspended for one month with provision to suspend for five years if undertaking given; otherwise, sentence to be served.

Orders

  • Copy of judgment to be forwarded to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Bar Council of India for information.
  • Suspension of sentence subject to contemnor's undertaking not to commit or attempt any act of criminal contempt for five years.