One among Shenoy’s contentions was that as per Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the proceedings should have been initiated by Justice Joseph herself since the incident occurred before her.
However, Senior Advocate S Sreekumar, who was appointed by the Court to conduct the case, argued that the said provision is only intended to enable High Courts or the Supreme Court to initiate proceedings for contempt committed in its presence or during a hearing. The counsel argued that the fact that the concerned judge did not proceed under Section 14 does not prevent the High Court from initiating suo motu contempt of court proceedings.
On this point, the Court, after exhaustively analysing relevant precedents, agreed with the senior counsel.
Based on this conclusion alone, several of the other procedural violations alleged by Shenoy were dismissed by the Court.
Source: Barandbench
