[12/7, 20:04] sekarreporter1: Today, the contempt petition filed by Thiru. A. Shankar who goes by the moniker Savukku Shankar on social media against DMK Organisation Secretary Thiru R.S. Bharati for a press conference by him came up for hearing before Hon’ble Division Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr. Justice D. Krishnakumar & Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Dhanabal. The registry had raised objections to the maintainability of the contempt petition since the consent to file contempt was earlier refused by the ld. Advocate General of Tamil Nadu. Mr. Ragavachari, ld. Senior Counsel appeared for savukku Shankar and contested that the petition is maintainable even without consent of the AG and notice should be issued in the same. Mr. Richardson Wilson, advocate for Mr. R.S. Bharati contended that the 1st petitioner is a convict, convicted of contempt of court and has scant regard for the judiciary and judicial officers. He submitted that the language used by Thiru A. Shankar on social media on judges, especially district judges is reprehensible and thus, at his instance, no petition for contempt is maintainable for protecting the image of the judiciary. After hearing arguments of both sides and considering the judgements, the Hon’ble Bench directed the petitioner to represent his case before the registry with the necessary endorsement that the case can be taken up as suo moto contempt and further directed the registry to act in accordance with the procedures . [12/7, 20:04] sekarreporter1:
[12/7, 20:04] sekarreporter1: Today, the contempt petition filed by Thiru. A. Shankar who goes by the moniker Savukku Shankar on social media against DMK Organisation Secretary Thiru R.S. Bharati for a press conference by him came up for hearing before Hon’ble Division Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr. Justice D. Krishnakumar & Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Dhanabal. The registry had raised objections to the maintainability of the contempt petition since the consent to file contempt was earlier refused by the ld. Advocate General of Tamil Nadu.
Mr. Ragavachari, ld. Senior Counsel appeared for savukku Shankar and contested that the petition is maintainable even without consent of the AG and notice should be issued in the same.
Mr. Richardson Wilson, advocate for Mr. R.S. Bharati contended that the 1st petitioner is a convict, convicted of contempt of court and has scant regard for the judiciary and judicial officers. He submitted that the language used by Thiru A. Shankar on social media on judges, especially district judges is reprehensible and thus, at his instance, no petition for contempt is maintainable for protecting the image of the judiciary.
After hearing arguments of both sides and considering the judgements, the Hon’ble Bench directed the petitioner to represent his case before the registry with the necessary endorsement that the case can be taken up as suo moto contempt and further directed the registry to act in accordance with the procedures .
[12/7, 20:04] sekarreporter1:
