Latest news with #Vanchinathan
The Hindu
31-07-2025
- The Hindu
Advocate Vanchinathan appears before Madurai City Cyber Crime police
Madurai High Court advocate S. Vanchinathan appeared before Madurai City Cyber Crime police on Thursday in connection with his complaint seeking probe into alleged 'leaking' of a confidential complaint he had lodged to the Supreme Court against a sitting High Court judge. After filing a written affidavit on his complaint with the police, Mr. Vanchinathan told reporters that he had named two advocates to be interrogated for leaking the scanned copy of his complaint in WhatsApp group of Madurai advocates on July 22 which subsequently went viral in social media. 'My complaint is to probe the issue as to how a confidentially complaint sent to the Apex Court got leaked in the social media. I have pointed out that enquiring the advocate who had shared it first in the WhatsApp group could solve the case. The police need to find out from where the advocate got the scanned copy of the complaint which was sent by registered post to the Supreme Court,' he added. Besides, it would help to find out who were all behind the incident. Stating that the leak of the copy of complaint lodged against a sitting High Court Judge for his actions in violation of the Constitution would pose threat to his life. 'If the complaint sent confidentially to the Supreme Court against a sitting High Court Judge is leaked in public domain, will it not discourge common man and other advocates from lodging similar complaints against sitting High Court Judges,' he asked. He also expressed dissatisfaction over the Cyber Crime police for not having registered the first information report on such a sensitive case.
India Today
29-07-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Madras High Court Judge calls lawyer's caste bias claim 'comedy, not revolutionary'
A lawyer who accused a sitting judge of caste-based bias was summoned by the Madras High Court's Madurai Bench, triggering a tense courtroom exchange and wider protests from sections of the legal Vanchinathan, who was appearing before Justices GR Swaminathan and K Rajasekhar in connection with a separate matter, was surprised when he was asked to explain a complaint he had earlier filed with the Chief Justice of the complaint, sent in June 2025, he had alleged that Justice GR Swaminathan was influenced by caste prejudice in his judicial conduct. The judge pointed out that Vanchinathan had also made these allegations publicly in a video interview with a YouTube channel.'For the past four years you've been acting like this. What is your stand on claiming that the judge is acting based on caste prejudice? You are making comedy by calling yourself revolutionary,' Justice Swaminathan said during the hearing.'Mr Vanchinathan, I 100 per cent respect your right to brutally criticise my judgments. But when you are alleging caste bias, things take a different turn,' Bar and Bench the court maintained that no contempt proceedings had been initiated against the lawyer yet, Justice Swaminathan said that while criticism of judicial decisions was acceptable, accusing a judge of caste bias was a serious matter that changed the nature of the declined to respond orally in court and sought a formal inquiry. The judge then directed the Registry to issue a written questionnaire to the lawyer. The matter has now been referred to the Chief Justice Bench for further proceedings.'For four years, you have been slandering me. I have not taken any action against you. We are also conscious of the rules of procedure. We are not fools. We will place the case before the Chief Justice or an appropriate bench. The whole ecosystem has ganged up—we are aware. We will not be intimidated or cowed down. Judicial independence is supreme,' the judge the incident, a group of lawyers staged a protest outside the Madras High Court on Monday in support of several retired Madras High Court judges issued a joint statement urging the Bench not to take direct action against Advocate Vanchinathan. They emphasised that complaints about judicial conduct should be addressed through the Chief Justice and not dealt with by the concerned judge.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Tamil Nadu
Indian Express
29-07-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
‘You are a comedy piece': Courtroom drama between Madras High Court judge, advocate who accused him of casteism
In a dramatic culmination of courtroom tension, the Madras High Court on Monday referred to the Chief Justice a contentious matter involving contempt allegations against Advocate S Vanchinathan, who had earlier accused Justice G R Swaminathan of caste and communal bias in his judicial conduct. The Division Bench of Justices Swaminathan and K Rajasekar, which had summoned the lawyer for an in-person explanation, declared that it would no longer proceed with the matter and, instead, directed the Registry to place the entire record before the Chief Justice. 'This matter may now be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice,' Justice Swaminathan said toward the end of the hearing, acknowledging repeated concerns over conflict of interest, including appeals from eight retired judges of the Madras High Court who had earlier urged the Bench to step back. Vanchinathan, a practising advocate and human rights activist based in Madurai, appeared in court on Monday in response to a summons issued on July 24. The court had sought a direct answer from him on whether he stood by his remarks in various media interviews and social media posts, where he allegedly accused Justice Swaminathan of favouring advocates from Brahmin backgrounds and targeting lawyers from Scheduled Caste communities. The Bench had asked, 'Do you continue to maintain your allegation that one of us is casteist in the discharge of judicial functions?' Vanchinathan declined to answer orally and requested that the court put its question in writing. In response, the Bench issued a formal questionnaire and posted the matter for July 28 — the day's hearing that eventually ended with the matter being transferred. On Monday, Justice Swaminathan asked Vanchinathan in open court regarding the allegations and also over what he described as a sustained smear campaign. 'For four years, you have been slandering me. We are also conscious of the rules of procedure. We are not fools,' the judge said. 'We will not be intimidated or cowed down. Judicial independence is supreme.' At one point during the hearing, he said, 'You are a comedy piece. I don't know who called you all revolutionaries. You are all comedy pieces.' While the court maintained that it had not officially initiated contempt proceedings, it observed that the line between criticism of judgments and personal attacks had been crossed. '(It is) most unfortunate that some retired judges are rendering opinions while the matter is pending before us,' Justice Swaminathan said. The Bench claimed that the proceedings against Vanchinathan 'have nothing to do' with the complaint he filed with the Chief Justice of India. The court said that its action was only a response to Vanchinathan's recent media interviews and online posts, which it said cast aspersions on the judge's integrity. The Bench also described Vanchinathan's recent public meeting and comments as 'tentatively amounting to contempt', though it stopped short of initiating any formal action, noting again that the matter was now being left to the discretion of the Chief Justice. Several advocates staged a demonstration in support of Vanchinathan, demanding that the contempt matter be dropped.
Time of India
28-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Vanchinathan case referred to chief justice; judge censures him
Madurai/Chennai: "You are a comedy piece, I don't know who called you a revolutionary." This was the remark made by Justice G R Swaminathan of Madras high court to a Madurai-based advocate S Vanchinathan, who had been summoned to court on Monday. Amidst protest by several Bar associations against the notice or any contempt action against Vanchinathan, a division bench of Justice Swaminathan and Justice K Rajasekar said it was not contempt notice but only a 'pre-cognizance notice'. Noting that the notice was sent for 'a scandalizing campaign' carried out by Vanchinathan in social media, the judges referred the matter to the chief justice of Madras high court for further proceedings. The first bench of Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice Sunder Mohan, before which the matter was mentioned on Monday, said the issue would be dealt with in the administrative side of the HC. It all began on July 24 when a division bench in Madurai first summoned Vanchinathan after he wrote a letter to the chief justice of India, complaining about Justice Swaminathan's orders and conduct both inside and outside the court. Taking exception to social media posts related to the issue, the judges asked Vanchinathan if he still stood by his allegations. To this, the advocate replied that he would respond only if the query was given in writing. The judges then ordered the court registry to issue a questionnaire to Vanchinathan. However, on July 26 seven former judges of the Madras high court wrote a common representation seeking the withdrawal of the proceedings against Vanchinathan. On their part, several Bar associations had declared that they would hold protests in front of the principal bench as well as the Madurai bench of the high court, besides the district court in Madurai. Several political parties had also issued statements against initiating contempt against Vanchinathan. On Monday, there were protests at several courts. On Monday, the bench expressed its dissatisfaction with the former judges who had signed the representation and said: "We have to record our dismay as to how such interference with the judicial process can be made. Several assumptions which have no factual basis have been made. We characterise their approach as most unfortunate." Vanchinathan has mobilized a group of lawyers and retired Judges to rush to his rescue, they said, adding, "they have also passed reckless comments without waiting for today's outcome. Gratuitous appeals and advice have poured forth. We ignore them with the contempt which they deserve." Cautioning that communal campaigns on social media would eventually weaken the judicial system itself, the bench said: "Time has come to regulate the level of discourse in social media. In the name of freedom of speech and expression, one cannot condone acts of contempt. The channels which rake in money by such slanderous campaigns will have to be taken head on. Lawyers who make such statements are guilty of professional misconduct. There is something called Laxman Rekha which if crossed must invite peril." Lawyers and judges belong to one large family, said the bench, adding: "They are members of the legal community. When a judge sits on the dais, he discharges his judicial duties as per his conscience and by strictly adhering to the judicial oath. He cannot be seen as carrying on his caste or religious labels while on the bench. If someone continues to have such a perception, he obviously has jaundiced eyes."
The Hindu
28-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Issue of advocate casting allegation against Justice Swaminathan goes to CJ
A Division Bench headed by Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Monday directed the High Court Registry to place before the Chief Justice the papers regarding advocate S. Vanchinathan accusing Justice Swaminathan of exhibiting caste bias. A Division Bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and K. Rajasekar had said Mr. Vanchinathan had been giving interviews to YouTube Channels accusing the judge of caste bias. On July 24, when he appeared before the court, he declined to answer to the question if he stood by his imputation, and instead sought a written questionnaire. A pre-cognisance notice was issued to him and he was directed to appear on July 28. The court said during the intervening weekend, a press conference was held and a statement was published on behalf of a few retired judges questioning the process adopted by the bench. 'We have to record our dismay as to how such interference with the judicial process can be made. Several assumptions which have no factual basis have been made. We characterise their approach as most unfortunate,' the judges said. Contending the proceedings had nothing to do with Mr. Vanchinathan's earlier complaint to the Chief Justice of India against the judge, the court said it issued the notice only because of the 'persistent campaign being conducted by Mr. Vanchinathan' in social media. 'We had not, till this moment, initiated any contempt action against Vanchinathan. That Vanchinathan has been slandering Justice Swaminathan is beyond dispute,' the court said. A video recording of one of the interviews of Vanchinathan was played in the court where such allegations were made. 'This interview is only a sample. There are scores of such YouTube videos.' The bench said it wanted to comply with the principles of natural justice before making a reference to the Chief Justice. 'Our intention was to close the matter if Vanchinathan indicated change of heart. He does not have any such intention. But he had been cleverly advised. He, therefore, declined to take any stand before us. His written reply is completely silent on the query raised in the notice,' the judges said. 'We judges have taken oath to discharge our judicial duties not only without favour but also without fear. When a judge disposes of a matter, the lawyer before him neither wins nor loses. It is the case that is won or lost. Lawyers and Judges belong to one large family. They are members of the legal community. When a Judge sits on the dais, he discharges his judicial duties as per his conscience and by strictly adhering to the judicial oath. He cannot be seen as carrying on his caste or religious labels while on the bench,' they added. 'If someone continues to have such a perception, he obviously has jaundiced eyes. The legal system provides for remedies and recourse has to be taken to them by persons aggrieved by individual decisions. Without doing so, launching communal campaigns on social media would eventually weaken the system itself. Time has come to regulate the level of discourse in social media. In the name of freedom of speech and expression, one cannot condone acts of contempt,' the bench said. The court felt the channels which rake in money by such slanderous campaigns would have to be taken head on. 'Lawyers who make such statements are guilty of professional misconduct. There is something called Laxman rekha which if crossed must invite peril,' the court observed. The judges said Mr. Vanchinathan had mobilised a group of lawyers and retired Judges to rush to his rescue. 'They have also passed reckless comments without waiting for today's outcome. Gratuitous appeals and advice have poured forth. We ignore them with the contempt which they deserve,' the judges said, adding, 'it is one thing to criticise judgments but entirely another to cast aspersions on judges.' Mr. Vanchinathan, in his reply, submitted that it was the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court who could take a call in the matter. 'We also have no doubt on this score,' the judges said, and directed the Registry to place the papers before the CJ for appropriate action.
