Karnataka High Court convicts former employee of IIA for contempt of court and sentences him to imprisonment for four months

The High Court of Karnataka has convicted a former employee of the Indian Institute of Astrophysics (IIA) in two separate instances of contempt of court – for filling a forged statement before the court and for making baseless and scandalous allegations against members of the legal fraternity and the judiciary – and sentenced him to imprisonment for four months in each case.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Vijaykumar A. Patil passed the order, while convicting K. Dhananjay on two separate contempt proceedings, one initiated on a complaint filed by the IIA and another initiated suo motu by the court.

IIA’s case

The IIA had filed a contempt of court petition in 2018 against him alleging that he was making baseless and scandalous allegations repeatedly in writing against members of the Central Administrative Tribunal, judges of the High Court, the Advocate-General and advocates representing the State and the Central governments in connection with proceedings on pleas challenging his dismissal from the IIA.

Meanwhile, the court in 2019 suo motu initiated another contempt proceedings for filling a forged statement of objection before the court, portraying as if it was filed on behalf of the Central government, by forging the signature of an advocate representing the Central government.

Noticing his conduct before the court during the contempt of court proceedings, the Bench said that “his conduct was not only far from expressing any remorse for the initial criminal contempt committed by him, but he had attempted to justify his actions and has proceeded to make scandalous and unfounded statements against the judicial institution as a whole.”

‘Sociopaths like him…’

“His conduct can only be termed as deliberate and adamant and reveals complete apathy towards social, moral and judicial codes of conduct. We are of the clear opinion that if conduct of this nature is not punished, sociopaths like the accused are likely to repeat such offences with impunity which would endanger the rule of law and the judicial system as a whole,” the Bench observed.

Pointing out that he could not place any mitigating circumstances that would explain his contemptuous conduct, the Bench said that he had committed “aggravated contempt on the face of the court by scurrilous, scandalous and baseless statements against advocates of this court, the Advocate-General and the government advocates as well as the judges of the court.”