The Kerala High Court has initiated suo motu criminal contempt of court proceedings against R. Rajesh, a former CPI(M) MLA and current member of the Kerala University Syndicate, over a Facebook post in which he alleged that the judges presiding over education-related cases, including the University Registrar suspension matter, were aligned with the Sangh Parivar.
In an order issued on July 7, Justice D.K. Singh stated that the post amounted to ex-facie criminal contempt, as it sought to scandalise the Court and interfere with ongoing judicial proceedings.
Rajesh’s controversial post, dated July 5, accused the bench hearing the university matters of being composed of staunch Sangh Parivar supporters. He went further to question whether justice was being upheld or compromised by ideological bias. One of his remarks questioned whether it was the “goddess of justice” or the “woman carrying the saffron flag” who had prevailed, implying political influence in judicial decisions.
The Court observed that such remarks were not a critique of any judgment but a direct attack on the judges themselves. The judge noted that these statements were not only scandalous but also damaging to the dignity and integrity of the judiciary.
“No individual, including public figures such as the alleged contemnor, can be allowed to make insinuations or accusations against judges that may undermine public confidence in the judiciary,” the order stressed. “Criticising judgments is within the bounds of democratic freedom, but maligning judges personally crosses the line into contempt.”
The proceedings come in the context of the University Registrar’s suspension case, which was being heard by the same bench. The High Court clarified that the action was not taken out of personal grievance but to uphold the constitutional mandate to protect the independence and authority of the judiciary.
Citing its powers under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Article 215 of the Constitution, and Rule 164(2) of the Kerala High Court Rules, the Court formally framed the following two charges against Rajesh:
That his Facebook post was intended to defame the image of the Court and insult the Judges hearing education-related matters.
That his statements were scandalous, baseless, and constituted criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act.
The Court emphasised that it had a constitutional and moral duty to act in defence of judicial integrity:
“The power to do justice includes the power to punish. Where a wrong has been done, adequate punishment becomes a divine obligation upon the Court.”
R. Rajesh has been directed to appear in person or through legal counsel before the High Court on July 23.
Ask ChatGPT
