http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SUB-COMMITTEE  ON  JUDICIAL  ACCOUNTABILITY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: JUSTICE V. RAMASWAMI

DATE OF JUDGMENT20/10/1994

BENCH: VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N.(CJ) BENCH: VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N.(CJ) AHMADI, A.M. (J) KULDIP SINGH (J)

CITATION:  1995 SCC  (1)   5        1994 SCALE  (4)634

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: ORDER 1.The "Sub-Committee on Judicial Accountability", a group of members  of the legal profession, has brought this  petition for suo motu initiation of proceedings for criminal contempt against  the respondent.  The matter is stated to arise  out of  a letter dated 21-1-1992 which the respondent  wrote  to the Enquiry Committee constituted under the Judges (Inquiry) Act,  1968  in  certain  proceedings  for  removal  of   the respondent  initiated  by Parliament.  In  this  letter  the respondent is said to have made certain sweeping allegations against  certain Judges and the Judiciary.  A copy  of  that letter is Annexure ’N to the petition. 2.We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and  have sought  the  assistance  of  Shri  Dipankar  Gupta,  learned Solicitor  General.  We place on record our appreciation  of the  valuable assistance rendered by the learned counsel  on both sides. 3.There  is  a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.  2164  of 1992  filed by Shri K.K. Jha, ’Kamal’, Advocate, Patna  High Court,  for intervention.  In our opinion, this  application for intervention is misconceived and is dismissed. 4.Though   the  letter,  read  by  itself,  raises   certain apprehensions  about its propriety, however, the  respondent himself by his subsequent letter dated 28-3-1992, which  has since  been brought on record, has explained the context  in which  it  was  written  and  the  apprehensions  about  the generality  of its sweep stand mitigated.  However, we  feel that  a lot of misunderstanding could have been  avoided  if the  letter  Annexure  ’A: had not  been  written.   We  are unhappy that it came to be written. 5.But,  on a careful consideration of the matter  we,  while expressing our unhappiness about the episode, however  think we  should  decline  in  the larger  interest  to  suo  motu institute   any   proceedings  for  contempt   against   the respondent.  The petition is dismissed accordingly.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

7