A pointed exchange between Justice GR Swaminathan and Senior Advocate Vikas Singh has been recorded in a judicial order of the Madras High Court during hearings in the Thiruparankundram Deepathoon contempt proceedings.
In a common order dated 4 March 2026, Justice Swaminathan rejected objections raised by Vikas Singh regarding the maintainability of contempt petitions and made unusually direct remarks about the senior advocate’s response during the hearing.
The contempt proceedings arise from alleged non-implementation of the court’s 1 December 2025 order directing the temple administration to light the Karthigai Deepam lamp at the Deepathoon on the hillock at Thiruparankundram Murugan Temple.
Vikas Singh Challenges Maintainability
Appearing for state authorities including the Madurai Police Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner of Police (South), Vikas Singh argued that the contempt petitions could not be heard by the single judge.
He invoked the doctrine of merger, contending that the December 1 order had already been challenged before a Division Bench and that the operative order was now that of the appellate bench.
According to Singh, once the Division Bench dealt with the matter, any contempt petition would have to be filed before that bench rather than before the single judge.
Judge Rejects Argument
Justice Swaminathan rejected the submission and held that the legal precedent cited by Singh was no longer valid.
Referring to the Supreme Court ruling in United Labour Federation v. Gagandeep Singh Bedi, the judge noted that contempt jurisdiction of a High Court does not disappear merely because its order has been affirmed in appeal.
The court observed: “It is obvious that 2020 SCC OnLine Mad 17972 cited by Shri Vikas Singh is no longer good law. The doctrine of merger will not apply when the order passed by the Single Judge is confirmed by the Division Bench.”
Justice Swaminathan added that he expected lawyers appearing before the court to rely only on valid precedents.
“I would expect the counsel appearing before me not to cite case-laws that are no longer hold good.”
“I Expected Him to Feel Sorry. Far from It.”
The order also records a pointed remark by the judge regarding the conduct of the senior advocate during the hearing.
Justice Swaminathan noted that Singh was appearing through video conferencing when the court pointed out the latest Supreme Court ruling contradicting his argument.
The judge wrote that during the exchange, someone passed a copy of the Supreme Court decision to Singh while the hearing was in progress.
Despite being shown the ruling, Singh continued to press the same submission.
Recording the episode in the order, Justice Swaminathan observed: “Shri Vikas Singh appeared through VC and even as I was pointing out to him about the latest decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, someone passed on to him a copy of it. I expected Shri Vikas Singh to feel sorry. Far from it. It is probably unlike the man.”
The judge noted that Singh nevertheless continued to argue that since the Division Bench had modified the order of the single judge, the contempt petitions could not be maintained before him.
Court says Police Resisted Implementation
Justice Swaminathan also recorded concerns that authorities had attempted to frustrate the implementation of his earlier order.
According to the court, a prohibitory order had been issued after the December 2025 judgment, which effectively prevented implementation of the direction to light the Deepam.
The judge stated that even after the prohibitory order was quashed, the police leadership in Madurai resisted implementing the court’s direction.
Warning Issued in Contempt Case
The court warned that if satisfactory responses were not filed, contempt charges would be framed against the officials concerned.
Justice Swaminathan directed that the police officers named in the proceedings remain present at the next hearing and fixed 18 March 2026 for further consideration.
In a broader caution recorded in the order, the judge also warned that even public dignitaries could be brought into the proceedings if reckless comments were made regarding the case.
“Before law all are one and no one can claim immunity merely because they happen to hold high offices.”
The matter has been adjourned for further hearing later this month.
Here’s the order passed by Justice G.R. Swaminathan of #MadrasHighCourt in contempt of court proceedings initiated before the Madurai Bench in connection with Thirupparankundram Karthigai Deepam issue pic.twitter.com/BjZztEgfL1
— Mohamed Imranullah S (@imranhindu) March 7, 2026
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
