Non-disclosure of facts amounts to misleading the court and attempting to interfere with the administration of justice, the court said.
The Supreme Court has initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against a Tamil Nadu sub-inspector of police for suppressing material facts in a bid to favour a convict who had approached the court seeking commutation of his death sentence in a murder case.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice Hima Kohli, was hearing a review petition filed by Sunder alias Sundarrajan, upon whom the death penalty had been imposed for murdering and sexually assaulting a seven-year-old boy on 27 July, 2009.
On 30 July, 2010, the trial court convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to death.
The Madras High Court confirmed the conviction and also subsequently dismissed an appeal by the petitioner. Challenging the high court order, the petitioner had approached the apex court.
Taking into account the merits of the case, the CJI Bench commuted the capital punishment imposed upon the petitioner to life imprisonment for not less than 20 years — without reprieve or remission.
During the hearing, the bench had sought details from Tamil Nadu regarding (i) the conduct of the petitioner in jail (ii) information on the petitioner’s involvement in any other case (iii) details of the petitioner acquiring education in jail (iv) details of petitioner’s medical records, and (v) any other relevant information.
Responding to the court’s request, the sub-inspector of police attached to Kammapuram in the Cuddalore district on 26 September, 2021, filed an affidavit stating that the conduct of the petitioner has been satisfactory and he had not been involved in any other case.
The officer also certified that the petitioner had acquired a diploma in food catering during his time in prison, and was suffering from systemic hypertension and availing medication from the prison hospital.
However, a separate affidavit filed by the superintendent of Cuddalore Central Prison mentioned that the petitioner had attempted to escape from prison on 6 November, 2013.
This aspect had been omitted in the affidavit filed by the sub-inspector.
Taking note of the omission, the bench observed: “The non-disclosure of material facts amounts to misleading this court and to an attempt at interfering with the administration of justice.”
Therefore, the court deemed it appropriate to initiate suo moto contempt proceedings against the respondent for withholding material information from the court, the CJI bench held.
“A notice is required to be issued to the onspector of police, Kammapuram Police Station, Cuddalore District, state of Tamil Nadu to explain why action should not be taken for the filing of the affidavit dated 26 September, 2021.
“In this case, prima facie, material information regarding the conduct of the petitioner in the prison was concealed from this court. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to register the matter as a suo motu proceeding for contempt of court,” the bench ordered.
May 05, 2024
May 05, 2024
May 04, 2024
May 04, 2024
May 04, 2024
May 03, 2024
