Advocate-General (A-G) Vijay Narayan had refused to grant consent to initiate criminal contempt of court proceedings against actor Suriya after coming to a conclusion that the latter did not intend to scandalise the court or lower its authority.
The A-G had relied on the records before him and without even following his usual practice of issuing notice to the alleged contemnor. “I do not see any necessity to issue notice on the question of admission of this contempt petition,” he said.
The actor issued a statement on Sunday expressing anguish over the Supreme Court refusing to exempt students from writing the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) despite the prevalence of COVID-19.
He said the court was conducting virtual hearings “fearing for life” of judges but was expecting the students to write exams without fear. This prompted Justice S.M. Subramaniam of the Madras High Court to write to Chief Justice Amreshwar Pratap Sahi to initiate contempt proceedings against the actor.
The Chief Justice referred the issue to the A-G since the latter’s consent was mandatory for initiation of criminal contempt of court proceedings, except suo motu, against any individual.
After taking the matter on file and considering it in the light of various Supreme Court judgments, the A-G said the actor appeared to have made the statement in anguish to highlight the plight of students who have to attend NEET amid the raging pandemic.
“The statement is neither a hostile criticism of judges or the judicial system nor a personal attack on any particular judge. Moreover, the conduct of NEET was not a subject matter of any proceedings before the Madras High Court and therefore the question of initiating proceedings in this court would not arise,” he concluded.
The A-G took note of the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in Prashant Bhushan’s case recently but heavily relied on the verdict in the case of Arundhati Roy in 2012 before deciding to refuse consent.
