The Supreme Court on Monday stayed suo motu orders and contempt proceedings sought to be initiated by a Madras High Court judge against the Chief Justice of High Court Sanjay K Kaul.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India H L Dattu said that there shall be stay on the notice of contempt issued by HC judge Justice C S Karnan and that he wouldn’t pass any orders in this matter till the case is decided by the top court.
The bench further said no person or judge shall interfere with the process of the appointment of civil judges initiated by HC Chief Justice on the administrative side.
Showing up for the HC Registry, Senior Advocate K Venugopal said that Justice Karnan’s request has conveyed notoriety to the foundation and consequently every legal work ought to additionally be withdrawn from him.
The CJI, be that as it may, said that this angle could be chosen the managerial side, as per the in-house method advanced by the higher legal.
Equity Karnan had set off a new line by undermining to document hatred of court procedures against Chief Justice Kaul, and cautioning that he would launch procedures against him under procurements of the SC/ST Atrocities (Prevention) Act.
In two different unsigned letters sent to Chief Justice Kaul (on April 16 and 30), Justice Karnan additionally expressed that he was suo motu keeping with it request of the Chief Justice concerning choice of common judges, discovering flaw with the arrangements.
Equity Karnan has said he would go to the National SC/ST Commission against Justice Kaul for “hassling” him.
In November 2011, Justice Karnan had made a vacillate by claiming that kindred judges had mortified him. He had said Dalit judges were focused on and their notoriety discolored at whatever point they attested their dignity.
In January a year ago, he had remarked against the high court collegium over the determination of judges, raging into a court listening to a PIL to make his point. In the most recent occurrence, Justice Karnan raised complaints against a five-part judge board meeting contender for determination as common judges. He blamed one for the judges with having a counterfeit degree authentication and scrutinized the incorporation of two judges from the same group and crew. He looked for that two of the judges be from minority groups, Muslim and Christian.
The Supreme Court had in March a year ago descended vigorously on Justice Karnan, terming his behavior for this situation as “coarse” and “uncharitable”.
The SC said Justice Karnan’s “raw unconventional protest” of walking into a courtroom and making statements when a division bench was hearing a writ petition against the appointments of judges to the High Court “raised a negative murmur about the maintenance of propriety in judicial proceedings.”
On Justice Karnan’s complaints of an upper caste bias in appointment of judges, the SC said that he may have “found himself caught in a conflict of class or caste structure and it appears that matured patience might have given way to injure rules of protocol.”
The court observed that such conduct may require a more serious judicial assessment in future. The apex court pointed out that immense dignity was expected from the judges, and that weaknesses or personal notions should not be exposed so as to affect judicial proceedings.
Once Justice Karnan had addressed a press conference at his chamber in which, narrating the “humiliation” and “embarrassment” he faced in the high court, he alleged that a fellow judge sitting cross-legged next to him at a meeting had touched him with his shoes deliberately and then said sorry. “Two other judges were watching it smiling,” he said.
In 2013, Justice Karnan had ruled that if a couple at the right legal age indulged in sexual gratification, it would be considered a valid marriage and they could be termed husband and wife.