CPM leader jailed for calling judges nincompoops

CPM leader jailed for calling judges nincompoops

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday sentenced top CPI(M) leader MV Jayarajan to six months imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2,000 in a contempt of court case.

By Tuesday evening, He was put in the Central Prison in Thiruvananthapuram as the court rejected his plea to suspend punishment to enable him to file appeal.

The court awarded Jayarajan, a member of the CPI(M)’s State committee and a two-time MLA, the maximum punishment possible under contempt of court provisions for his description of two High Court judges as “nincompoops” in the name of a judgement of June 23, 2010 banning public meetings, protests and other programmes on the roadsides.

A division bench of Justices V Ramkumar and PQ Barqatali said that Jayarajan had with his description of the judges as nincompoops amounted to disrespect for the court among the public and that it had affected the court’s credibility. The judges noted that Jayarajan had even exhorted the public not to consider the ban on roadside meetings seriously.

Jayarajan, one of the top leaders of the powerful Kannur lobby in the CPI(M), will have to undergo additional imprisonment for one month if he does not pay the Rs 2,000 fine. The court clarified that it was not necessary that it entertain an application for suspension of punishment for giving time to file appeal.

The Marxist leader was put in a single cell at Block 7 of the Thiruvananthapuram prison - where former minister R Balakrishna Pillai was lodged for corruption - considering security concerns as he was a prominent political leader and a former MLA. Hundreds of slogan-shouting CPI(M) activists had gathered in front of the prison to declare support to him.

State CPI(M) secretary Pinarayi Vijayan alleged that the court verdict amounted to denial of natural justice and the judges had violated the fundamental right of an individual to get time to file appeal. “We cannot find fault with anyone who views the verdict as an act of revenge,” he said after an urgent meeting of party State secretariat in Thiruvananthapuram.

The party secretary added that appeal against the High Court judgement would be filed in the Supreme Court. The party also made it clear that it would deal with the judgement both legally and politically. The police had to take Jayarajan out of the High Court through its rear gate as CPI(M) and DYFI activists, enraged by the verdict, held protest demonstrations outside.

Activists thronged each important junction on the National Highway from Kochi to Thiruvananthapuram to declare their solidarity with Jayarajan as the police took him to the prison. At several points on the route to Thiruvananthapuram, attempts were made by the party activists to block the police vehicle carrying Jayarajan.

Jayarajan had made the controversial statement that invited the contempt proceeding while speaking at a DYFI programme in Kannur on June 26, 2010. Reacting to the court order banning roadside meetings, Jayarajan said, “Some nincompoops (Sumbhan in Malayalam), sitting in judges’ chairs, are formulating laws instead of doing their actual job of interpreting them.”

“What they are saying is… They (will) make laws and they will enforce them. This has created a situation where a verdict (ban on roadside meets) of two judges is not even given “the value of grass” by the people of Kerala,” he said. A three-judge bench of the High Court on October 12, 2010 decided to initiate contempt proceedings against Jayarajan over this speech.

The court had on June 10 last chargesheeted him after finding that the terminologies he had used to describe judges were intended to “humiliate, scandalize and lower the authority” of the court in the eyes of public and also to interfere with the administration of justice. In August last, the court framed fresh charges against him.

Responding to the verdict, Chief Minister Oommen Chandy said those in public life should have respect in their language while speaking about the Judiciary. “I cannot accept the mentality that the Judiciary is good when a verdict is in my favour and bad when it goes against my interests,” he said.