The Madras High Court Bench here on Tuesday rejected a lawyer’s plea to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against Law Minister D. Durai Murugan for alleged use of the expression “judicial varnashram” to describe the failure to accommodate MLA/MPs on the dais in inaugural functions of court buildings.
A Division Bench, comprising Justice Prabha Sridevan and Justice B. Rajendran, refused to direct its Registry to number the contempt of court application filed by the advocate C. Ezhil Arasu of Kumbakonam in Thanjavur district.
The unnumbered petition was listed for hearing on Tuesday to decide its maintainability.
The petitioner claimed that the Minister had attended the inauguration of a court complex at Thiruvaiyaru on January 2.
He had said that the judiciary was following “varnashram” similar to the one followed in temples where a sculptor was not allowed to touch the statue made by him after it was installed in the sanctum sanctorum.
Chief Justice Hemant Laxman Gokhale and three other judges of the High Court were present when the remarks were made.
The Minister had repeated the remarks while answering a question in the Assembly on January 8. This had been reported widely in many Tamil newspapers, the petitioner said.
His counsel W. Peter Ramesh Kumar contended that the speech on “judicial varnashram” was not expunged from Assembly records as was done in the case of certain other remarks made by the Minister against the judiciary.
Stating that the speech clearly amounted to contempt of court, he said: “It is a very delicate thing. I am unable to argue much.”
The judges informed the lawyer that they had not directed the Registry to number the petition. When counsel sought leave of the court to file an appeal before the Supreme Court, the judges said that no such leave was required in this case.
