Kerala High Court Sentences 'V4 Kochi' President Nipun Cherian To 4 Months Imprisonment In Suo Motu Contempt Case
The Kerala High Court on Thursday sentenced 'V4 Kochi' President, Nipun Cherian, to four months imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000 in the suo motu contempt case for his statements against a sitting judge of the High Court. The contempt case pertains to a speech made by Cherian before farmers, fishermen, and representatives of the local people of Chellanam where he had levelled 'allegations...
The Kerala High Court on Thursday sentenced 'V4 Kochi' President, Nipun Cherian, to four months imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000 in the suo motu contempt case for his statements against a sitting judge of the High Court.
The contempt case pertains to a speech made by Cherian before farmers, fishermen, and representatives of the local people of Chellanam where he had levelled 'allegations of corruption' against a sitting judge of the High Court. The speech was live streamed and uploaded in the Facebook page of 'V4 Kochi' on October 25, 2022.
The Division Bench comprising Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. today refused to accept Cherian's request to stay the sentence so that he could approach the Supreme Court in appeal. The Court clarified that the appeal could be filed even while serving the sentence.
The Bench observed that Cherian, apart from not tendering any apology in the matter, also firmly stood by his allegations against the Judge at every stage during the proceedings, as well as during the final hearing, and asserted that he was justified in making those allegations based on the hearsay evidence that he relied upon, and attempted to establish through the witnesses brought by him.
"Faced with such conduct on the part of the litigant, we cannot remain silent spectators to such frontal attacks on the majesty of the judicial institution which is often seen as the last bastion of hope for the litigants in the country. Under such circumstances, and more so since the conduct of the respondent throughout the proceedings has been that of an obstinate and arrogant litigant whose actions are intended to lower the public faith in the judicial institution through the baseless allegations made against a learned Judge of this Court, we are of the view that he does not deserve any lenient view in the matter of punishment," the Court held, while sentencing the contemnor.
The Contempt Case
The High Court had initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against Cherian in November 2022, stating that the speech made by him "is contumacious, and made with an intention to tarnish the integrity of the Honourable Judge". The court had stated that Cherian's speech amounted to scandalizing the authority of the Court, and interfered in the due course of judicial proceedings, as well as lowered the authority of the Court amongst the general public.
While expressing displeasure at the conduct of Cherian, the court had earlier observed, "It is only when confronted with comments or remarks that go well beyond personal attacks, and have the propensity to defame or lower the esteem of the judicial institution itself, that they respond swiftly with the only weapon in their judicial armoury – the proceedings for contempt of court. Even on such occasions, their efforts are directed solely at preserving the majesty of the judicial institution and ensuring that the misconceived actions of some do not destroy the faith of the majority in an institution that has for long remained the last bastion of hope against rights infringement for our citizens".
The Court took note that in spite of affording an opportunity to Cherian to introspect on the averments in the affidavit filed by him and file a fresh affidavit containing an unconditional apology for making those statements that were prima facie contemptuous and scandalous, the contemnor nevertheless chose to re-iterate his his original stand in the subsequent affidavit before the court on January 17, 2023, and proceeded to unauthorizedly post video clippings of the court proceedings on social media. The Court noted that he had also issued a press release glorifying himself for not having succumbed to the alleged pressures exerted by this court to tender an apology.
On January 25, 2023, when the charges framed against Cherian were read over to him, he pleaded 'Not Guilty' to the charges.
The Court had directed the issuance of a non-bailable warrant to the District Police Chief, Ernakulam, for the arrest and production of Cherian on February 21, 2023. He was subsequently granted bail on February 27, 2023.
Findings of the Court
The Court observed that the contemnor had in this case, clearly admitted to making the public speech casting aspersions on the honesty and integrity of the sitting Judge of the High Court, whom he publicly accused of being corrupt. It noted that the evidence led by the contemnor was to try and establish that he had merely stated the truth and was therefore justified in making those statements in public.
"Towards that end it is his case that the aspersions cast on the honesty and integrity of the Judge were in relation to the executive actions of the Judge and not his judicial actions; that when the court carries out and supervises an executive task that forms part of the lis between two parties, it loses its character as an adjudicating authority and, consequently, the statements made against the Judge in that capacity cannot constitute a contempt of court," it further noted.
The Court observed that the oral evidence adduced on behalf of Cherian, merely introduced more damning allegations against the Judge based on hearsay, instead of establishing any truth in the statements made by Cherian in his speech. It also took note of the contemnor's argument that Section 13 (1)(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('Criminal misconduct by a public servant') would be applicable in this case against the Judge.
"On a consideration of the pleadings in this case as also the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution and the respondent, and after hearing the prosecutor and the respondent in extenso, we are of the view that the charge against the respondent stands established primarily on account of his admission regarding the making of the speech as also on account of the lack of any material that would inspire confidence in this court regarding the truth of the offending statements made in that speech," the Court observed.
It noted that in spite of the Court offering to take a lenient view against the contemnor if he were to repent for his actions and tender an unconditional public apology, the latter chose to ignore its advise and continue to contest the matter, by maintaining that he stood by what he said against the Judge.
"...while fair and temperate criticism of the court, even if strong, may not be actionable, the attributing of improper motives or actions that tend to bring Judges or courts into hatred and contempt, and thereby erode public confidence in the judicial institution, will certainly lead to the invocation of the contempt jurisdiction so as to uphold the majesty and dignity of the courts of law. This is because, if an impression is created in the minds of the public that the Judges in the highest court of this State act on extraneous considerations in deciding cases, the confidence of the whole community in the administration of justice is bound to be undermined, and we cannot remain mute spectators in such situations. On the facts of the instant case, we find that the respondent has unambiguously admitted to making the speech and has also not succeeded in establishing a defence of justification by truth. The entire evidence relied upon by him is hearsay and does not inspire confidence in this court. As regards the contention of the respondent that the learned Judge was carrying out and supervising executive tasks and therefore lacking the character of an adjudication, the same has to be rejected outright as the learned Judge had passed the judgment with directions as part of his judicial duty," the Court observed, while holding Cherian guilty of contempt.
The Court thus proceeded to sentence Cherian to simple imprisonment for a period of four months, taking note that the contemnor is a 36 year old Graduate Engineer who could possibly 'understand the gravity of his misconduct through sufferance of a lesser punishment, and will hopefully desist from resorting to such actions in future'. It was added that any period of imprisonment already undergone by the contemnor during the course of the proceedings would be set off against the said period of imprisonment.
The Court also imposed a fine of Rs. 2000 on Cherian and directed the same to be paid within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment, on default of which the contemnor was directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month.
The Court further directed the Station House Officer, Cyber Cell, Ernakulam to take all necessary steps to remove the video containing Cherian's offending speech from all electronic media platforms.
Prosecutor Dheerendrakrishnan K.K. appeared in the present case.
Case Title: Suo Motu v. Nipun Cherian
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 325