Kerala High Court Rejects Ex-MLA R Rajesh's Appeal Against Initiation Of Contempt Case Over FB Post Against Judge

The Kerala High Court on Monday (July 21) held that the appeal preferred by former MLA R. Rajesh against the criminal contempt proceedings initiated against him for making a 'stinking Facebook post' against a sitting judge, was not maintainable.

The division bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. was hearing the question of maintainability of the appeal today.

The appeal was unnumbered as a defect was noted by the High Court Registry.

The suo motu criminal contempt charges were framed by Justice D.K. Singh after Rajesh (alleged contemnor) made a Facebook post which allegedly criticised the judges heading the Bench hearing education matters. According to the charges, the alleged contemnor's language amounted to scandalising the Court and maligning the reputation of the judge(s).

It was against this interim order that an appeal was preferred by the alleged contemnor. According to the interim order, the ex-MLA and Kerala University Member (alleged contemnor) was directed to appear before the Court on July 23 at 10:15 am.

During the hearing, Advocate Harikumar G appearing for the High Court submitted that for an appeal to lie under Section 19(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, the impugned order must be inextricably connected with the order punishing for contempt. In the case at hand however, it was pointed that only charges have been framed and there is no conviction or punishment yet.

"The wordings used in Section 18 is 'heard' and 'determined'. When a case is initiated by the High Court suo motu, there is no hearing. It is only when the respondent appears before the Court pursuant to the notice that the hearing occurs," the counsel submitted.

Senior counsel Deepak P. on the other hand, appearing for the ex-MLA argued that it is only the Chief Justice or designated judge who can initiate contempt action. "The learned single judge cannot go on and straight away frame charges. He can only direct it to be placed before the appropriate Bench," he submitted.

After a detailed hearing, the division bench held that the appeal was not maintainable and observed that the defect noted by the Registry was sustained.

"These are only procedural aspects and this can certainly be raised before the appropriate bench," it orally observed.

The detailed order is awaited.

Case Title: R. Rajesh v. High Court of Kerala

Case Filing No: Con.APP(C) 4/2025

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 438

Counsel for the appellant: Deepak P. (Sr.), Rilgin V. George, K.T. Raveendran, Meera J. Menon, Alfiya A.

Counsel for the respondent: Harikumar G. - Standing Counsel, High Court of Kerala