Kerala High Court Closes Suo Motu Criminal Contempt Against Advocate | Accepts Unconditional Apology Under Rule 14(a) After Disruption in Magistrate Court
Safiya Malik
The High Court of Kerala Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K. V. Jayakumar held that the unconditional apology tendered by the respondent–an advocate practicing at the Ettumanoor Bar–fulfilled the requirements under Rule 14(a) of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1988. The Court accordingly accepted the apology and directed that the suo motu contempt proceedings initiated against him be closed, thereby discharging the respondent from further liability.
The contempt proceedings originated from an incident on 02 February 2023 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate–I, Ettumanoor. On that day, the respondent, an advocate with more than 25 years of practice at the Kottayam Bar, appeared in connection with bail applications filed on behalf of his clients. Following the dismissal of the applications, he is stated to have reacted in an intemperate and disruptive manner in open court.
According to the record, the respondent raised his voice and berated the Magistrate in an ill-mannered tone. The conduct allegedly disturbed the proceedings to such an extent that the Magistrate was unable to carry on the day’s judicial work in an orderly fashion. The disruption was formally communicated to the High Court by the Judicial First Class Magistrate–I, Ettumanoor, through a letter dated 02 February 2023 (Annexure A). Subsequently, the District Judge, Kottayam, also forwarded a report dated 28 April 2023 (Annexure B) on the matter.
In view of these reports, the High Court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1988. The case was formally registered as Cont.Case (Crl.) No. 5 of 2023.
Pursuant to Rule 14(a) of the 1988 Rules, which permits a contemnor to tender an unconditional apology for consideration of the Court, the respondent was directed by order dated 03 July 2025 to appear in person. On 09 July 2025, he complied with this directive and appeared before the Division Bench. On that occasion, he expressed his intention to file an unconditional apology. He also emphasized his long-standing legal practice and assured the Bench of his continued respect towards the judiciary.
The respondent subsequently filed an affidavit of apology dated 19 July 2025. In this affidavit, he expressed regret for the incident, clarified that he never intended to show indignation or disrespect, and acknowledged his responsibility as an officer of the Court to uphold the dignity and authority of judicial institutions. He also mentioned that his wife was an advocate at the Kottayam Bar, reiterating his familial and professional association with the legal fraternity. Alongside, he submitted earlier communications, including a letter dated 13 June 2023 (Annexure-R1(A)) and a reply dated 10 July 2023 (Annexure-R1(B)), addressed to the Registrar (District Judiciary).
Thus, by the time of final hearing on 18 August 2025, the Division Bench had before it the facts of the disruption, the letters from the subordinate judiciary, and the apology affidavit sworn by the respondent.
The Bench carefully examined the facts, documents, and the respondent’s affidavit of apology. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V, speaking for the Bench, recorded the following judicial reasoning: “This Contempt Case has been initiated suo motu against the respondent, who is an Advocate practising in the Ettumanoor Bar for disrupting the proceedings of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ettumanoor, and thereby interfering with the due course of judicial proceedings.”
The Court recounted the incident of 02 February 2023, noting: “He is stated to have berated the Court in an ill-mannered and intemperate fashion. It is further alleged that the respondent, by shouting in open court, disrupted the court proceedings, making it impossible for the learned Magistrate to carry on with the proceedings in an orderly manner and thereby obstructed the due administration of justice.”
With respect to the applicable legal framework, the Court referred to the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1988: “Under Rule 14 (a) of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1988, if the respondent tenders an unconditional apology after admitting that he has committed the contempt, the court may proceed to pass such orders as deems fit.”
The Court then recorded the steps taken after issuing notice to the respondent: “By order dated 03.07.2025, the respondent was directed to appear in person. On 09.07.2025, the respondent appeared in person and submitted that he intends to file an unconditional apology in terms of Rule 14(a) of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1988.”
The contents of the affidavit dated 19 July 2025 were specifically extracted in the judgment. The respondent had sworn: “I understand that my behaviour before the Hon'ble Court on 02.02.2023 while appearing in the aforementioned bail application seems to be perceived by the Hon'ble Judge as showing indignation and disrespect, which I never intended. I would like to clarify that no such intent was ever harboured on my part.”
He continued: “Hence, I hereby tender an unconditional apology, and I swear that I shall uphold the sanctity and dignity of this institution all along. I do not hesitate to bow down to the authority of the court and tender an apology unconditionally with all humility and with a sense of responsibility as an officer of this court.”
The Court, after considering the tenor of the apology, observed: “We are satisfied that the apology aforesaid of the respondent is in tune with the requirement of Rule 14(a) of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, 1988.”
On the basis of the affidavit and submissions, the Court pronounced its final directive: “In that view of the matter, we accept the unconditional apology tendered by the respondent/contemnor and he is discharged. This Contempt Case is closed.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Suo motu action by the High Court of Kerala
For the Respondents: Adv. K. M. Santhoshkumar, by Advs. Sri. S. S. Aravind and Shri. G. Sreekumar (Chelur)
Case Title: Suo Motu v. AAA
Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:61884
Case Number: Contempt Case (Criminal) No. 5 of 2023
Bench: Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V and Justice K. V. Jayakumar
