Paloli

Kochi, April 2: Kerala High Court today gave a state minister a tongue-lashing for alleging the judiciary had its motives for taking decisions, saying he had inflicted “a deep wound” on the judicial system.

It said local administration minister Paloli Mohammadkutty had “shaken the confidence of the people in the system of dispute resolution and rendering justice” through remarks he allegedly made at a Kozhikode public meet in January.

The division bench of acting Chief Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan and Justice M.N. Krishnan declined to drop contempt proceedings against him, saying he had brought the administration of justice to “disrespect” and “disrepute”.

A similar contempt suit had been brought against Left Front chairman Biman Bose in 2004, charging him with making derogatory comments against Justice Amitava Lala after he passed an order banning rallies in Calcutta on weekdays.

Biman is alleged to have raised slogans saying “Lala, go back” at a rally to protest the ban.

Although Biman claimed the media had distorted his statement, he was directed by Calcutta High Court to serve a sentence of three days’ simple imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs 10,000 for inciting popular sentiment against Lala.

No such order has been given to Paloli but the court today suggested he could contain the damage a little by unconditionally apologising in public to restore the confidence of the people in the judiciary.

“We do not propose to give any direction to Paloli to tender apology or express any regret to the general public because an act of apology should be an act of real repentance.

“We feel if such a course is adopted, it would to some extent mitigate the dangers caused to the system and may weigh with the court when this court finally decides to consider a plea whether or not to accept an apology by Paloli.”

Posting the case for hearing on April 11, the court said Paloli’s remarks had been “outrageous”, “abusive” and “grave” and amounted to contempt, and that they had the “tendency to shake the basic structure of the judicial system” and undermine the deep-rooted faith people had in courts.

Paloli was not a layman but a minister and had taken oath to uphold the Constitution and law, it said. Given this, his words were more likely to impact people’s minds than those of a bureaucrat, former minister or judge.

“Judges are confident about the stability and strength of the system and will not wither in the heat of controversy. They are seasoned to contain personal abuses hurled on them and have the strength to ignore isolated abusive comments,” it said.

The court, which launched suo motu contempt proceedings against Paloli, had asked him to appear before it on February 15. But the minister filed a petition seeking exemption from personal appearance and was allowed to appear on February 26. Paloli then made an unconditional apology and expressed “sincere” and “deep regret” for his speech.