Kerala High Court
Biju Antony Aloor @ B A Aloor vs The Principal District And Sessions ... on 27 January, 2018
Author: Shaji P. Chaly
Bench: Shaji P. Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P. CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1940
W.P.(C).No. 18432 of 2018
PETITIONER(S):
BIJU ANTONY ALOOR @ B A ALOOR, ADVOCATE,
AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. ANTONY,
ALOOR ASSOCIATES, SIMON SQUARE,
NEAR KOMBARA JUNCTION,
MARKET ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 018.
BY ADVS.SRI. K. RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
SMT.R.S.ASWINI SANKAR
SRI.T.H.ARAVIND
SRI.S.M.PRASANTH
SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI
SRI.G.RENJITH
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 011.
2. MR. SHAFEEK N.A., ADVOCATE,
AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN,
NAVULLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHAKKARAPARAMBU,
THAMMANAM P.O., KOCHI-682 032.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ON 06-06-2018,
THE COURT ON 12-06-2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.T.O.
WP(C).No. 18432 of 2018 (D)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT, DATED 27-01-2018.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 02-02-2018 ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT `
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT, DATED 02-03-2018.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16-03-2018 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
IN CRL. M. P. NO.351 OF 2018 IN SC NO.662/2016.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
C.R.
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.18432 of 2018
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of June, 2018
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash Ext.P4 order passed by the Court of Session, Ernakulam Division in Crl.M.P No.351 of 2018 in SC No.662 of 2016, in a contempt proceedings, and referred the matter to the High Court in accordance with the provisions of Sec.15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
2. Material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:
3. Petitioner is a legal practitioner with 18 years of standing, who claims to have appeared in several Courts throughout India. It is also stated that, he always holds all courts with respect and regard, and till date, petitioner has not made any comment or observation about any court in a disparaging or disrespectful manner.
4. Petitioner appeared in S.C.No.662 of 2016 on the files of the Principal Sessions Court, Ernakulam. That was a case which attracted State-wide attention with an incident W.P.(C) No.18432 of 2018 2 related to a murder of 30 year old law student. One migrant labourer from Assam was the accused and after trial, the Principal Sessions Court, Ernakulam found him guilty and convicted and sentenced him to death, by judgment dated 13.12.2017.
5. Since the case had attracted wide attention among the people, the media including electronic media was meticulously following the case at every stage, and the court had forbidden them from attending the trial. Petitioner, after the pronouncement of the judgment and sentence, came out of the court, and a cluster of media persons rushed to him for his reaction about the judgment. According to the petitioner, he did not make any disparaging reference against the Sessions Judge, but only informed the media that he proposes to file an appeal, as the judgment, according to him, suffers from various errors. The print media has reported the comments of the petitioner not strictly in conformity or the exact words spoken by him. Though the petitioner had never made any disrespectful remarks about the Principal District Judge, Ernakulam, one of the lawyers who had a grouse against the petitioner, the 2nd respondent herein, filed an application under W.P.(C) No.18432 of 2018 3 Sec.15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging contempt against the petitioner and seeking reference to the High Court.
6. On receipt of the same, petitioner was issued with a notice by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ernakulam and the petition was numbered as Crl.M.P No.351 of 2018. Petitioner entered appearance and submitted a detailed defence statement raising various contentions including lack of competence of the applicant before the Court of Sessions and the total un-sustainability of the petition before the Court of Sessions. However, the Court of Sessions has passed an order on 16.03.2018, referring the matter to the High Court of Kerala under Sec.15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 r/w Rule 8 of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, for proceeding against the petitioner in accordance with law.
7. The case advanced by the petitioner in this writ petition is that, the entire proceeding initiated against the petitioner under the Contempt of Courts Act by the 2 nd respondent and the order passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Ernakulam are all tainted with illegalities and irregularities and therefore, the reference is illegal and W.P.(C) No.18432 of 2018 4 arbitrary.
8. I have heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the documents on record and the pleadings put forth by the petitioner.
9. As is discussed above, the sole question to be considered by this Court is, whether any manner of interference is possible in Ext.P4 reference order passed by the Sessions Judge, Ernakulam. A reference to Sec.15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 would be worthwhile in this regard, which read thus:
b