If Not Punished, Sociopaths Like Him May Repeat Offence: Karnataka High Court Convicts Man For Making False Allegations Against Judges

The Karnataka High Court recently convicted one K. Dhananjay, for criminal contempt and sentenced him to four month imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 2,000 for making scandalous and unfounded allegations against judges and judicial institution as a whole. The court directed him to be taken into custody forthwith.The accused was convicted for making false and unsubstantiated allegations against Members of the Central Administrative Tribunal ('CAT' for short) and Judges of the Karnataka High Court in multiple proceedings and representations. A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Vijaykumar A Patil, passed the order on the contempt petition filed by Indian Institute of Astrophysics and a suo-motu petition initiated by the court. It said “We have given our anxious consideration to the pleadings and the materials on record. We have also noticed the conduct of the accused before the Court. Far from expressing any remorse for the initial criminal contempt committed by him, he has attempted to justify his actions and has proceeded to make scandalous and unfounded statements against the judicial institution as a whole. His conduct can only be termed as deliberate and adamant and reveals complete apathy towards social, moral and judicial codes of conduct.” It added “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 complainant-Indian Institute of Astrophysics, had alleged that after the accused's dismissal from service, he levelled several serious allegations against the management of the institution, members of CAT and the judiciary. Further, in the various pleadings and representations, made to the Chief Justice of India, President of India and Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka, the allegations made by the accused are false, vindictive and deliberately intended to scandalise the Court and destroy public confidence in the Judiciary. “It is submitted that the accused has repeatedly attacked the integrity, impartiality and dignity of sitting Judges and Tribunal Members, without remorse,” it was said.In the memorandum of objections filed by the accused, he alleged that judges of the Court were involved in "case fixing deal crime" and other "grave and heinous criminal acts." He had alleged that the judges influenced other judges to pass orders which were "colourful and deceptive influences." Consequently, making him a victim of "dictatorial punishment." He further accused judicial officers, CAT members, police and the Complainant of criminal conspiracy. He claimed that he was a "whistleblower" under target. The government advocate submitted that the derogatory and contemptuous language used by the accused both in his pleadings and in the submissions made by him before the Court are scandalous in nature and amount to clear contempt in the face of the Court. The bench on going through records said “We notice that he (accused) has not clearly denied the conduct attributed to him in the charges anywhere. The evidence adduced by him also, is not intended to deny the charges framed against him, but is only an attempt to cast aspersions on all involved.” Following which it held “Having considered the evidence adduced in this case, we are of the clear view that the charges levelled against the accused stands proved. The accused has not been able to place any mitigating circumstances that would explain his contemptuous conduct. He has committed aggravated contempt in the face of the court by scurrilous, scandalous and baseless statements against Advocates of this Court, the Advocate General and Government Advocates as well as the Judges of the Court. The very demeanor and tone of the accused is clearly contemptuous of the orders and authority of the Court and the judicial system as such.” The court thus convicted the accused/contemnor for Criminal Contempt of Court punishable under Section 12(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act.Appearance: Advocate Syed Kashif for Advocate Pradeep S Sawkar. Advocate B Ravindranath, Amicus Curiae for Complainant.K. Dhananjay- (PARTY IN PERSON). Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 434Case Title: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF ASTROPHYSICS AND K DhananjayClick Here To Read/Download Order

If Not Punished, Sociopaths Like Him May Repeat Offence: Karnataka High Court Convicts Man For Making False Allegations Against Judges

Mustafa Plumber

Tags