In Re: Sri Justice C.S. Karnan

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 9 May 2017 Suo Motu Contempt Petition(C) No. 1 of 2017 (2017) 123 CutLT 1072 : (2017) 2 RCRCivil 934 : (2017) 2 RCRCriminal 878 : (2017) 3 RecentApexJudgments(RAJ) 225 : (2017) 6 Scale 123 : AIR 2017 SC 3191 : (2017) 7 SCC 1 : (2017) 6 JT 602
Bench: Full Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Suo Motu Contempt Petition(C) No. 1 of 2017

Hon'ble Bench

Jagdish Singh Khehar, CJ; Dipak Misra, J; J. Chelameswar, J; Ranjan Gogoi, J; Madan B. Lokur, J; Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J; Kurian Joseph, J

Advocates

Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv, Chanchal Lr. Ganguli, Ms. Narmada, Advocates, for the State of West Bengal; Maninder Singh, ASG, Ms. Madhvi Divan, Nalin Kohli, Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Prabhash Bajaj, Advocates, for the UOI; K.K. Venugopal, Sr. Adv, Nikhil Nayyar, N. Sai Vinod, Ms. Smriti Shah, Divyanshu Rai, Advocates, for the Registrar General, High Court of Madras; Rupinder Singh Suri, Sr. Adv, Ajit Kr. Sinha, Sr. Adv, Gaurav Bhatia, M. Yogesh Kanna, Ms. Nithya, Mrs. Maha Lakshmi, Partha Sarathi, Ms. Uttara Babbar, Ms. Akanksha Choudhary, Advocates, for the Supreme Court Bar Asson.

Final Decision

Disposed Of

Acts Referred

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 12

Judgement Text

Translate:

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

1. We have heard Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel representing the State of West Bengal, with reference to the medical examination

of Sri Justice C.S. Karnan, as also, Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, Mr. K.K.Venugopal, learned senior

counsel representing the Registrar General, High Court of Judicature at Madras, and Mr. Rupinder Singh Suri, Senior Advocate, in his capacity as

the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

2. On merits, we are of the considered view, that Sri Justice C.S. Karnan, has committed contempt of the judiciary. His actions constitute

contempt of this Court, and of the judiciary of the gravest nature. Having found him guilty of committing contempt, we convict him accordingly. We

are satisfied to punish him by sentencing him to imprisonment for six months. As a consequence, the contemnor shall not perform any administrative

or judicial functions.

3. Detailed order to follow.

4. The sentence of six months imposed by this Court on Sri Justice C.S. Karnan, shall be executed forthwith, by the Director General of Police,

West Bengal, or through a team constituted by him.

5. Since the incident of contempt includes public statements and publication of orders made by the contemnor, which were highlighted by the

electronic and print media, we are of the view, that no further statements made by him should be published hereafter. Ordered accordingly.

6. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

From The Blog
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi & Others vs State of U.P. & Others (1990)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi & Others vs State of U.P. & Others (1990)
Read More
Rustom Cavasjee Cooper (Appellant) Vs Union of India (Respondent) (1970)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

Rustom Cavasjee Cooper (Appellant) Vs Union of India (Respondent) (1970)
Read More