The Madras High Court ruled that trial judges must actively participate in proceedings and not remain passive observers. Justices GR Swaminathan and R Poornima restored a money recovery suit, holding that courts must seek clarifications and ensure fair trial principles through judicial engagement.
The Madras High Court refused to ban the Tamil film Karuppu, observing that portraying judicial corruption and criticising the judiciary cannot automatically amount to contempt, while emphasising that judges are not beyond scrutiny and freedom of artistic expression must be protected in a democratic society.
The Madras High Court sought a response from the Election Commission of India on allegations that Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam used children during the 2026 Tamil Nadu election campaign, while questioning whether a political party itself could face disqualification for corrupt practices.
Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court criticized self-proclaimed rationalists for mocking devotees who revere gurus as divine, stating that those who label believers as “scoundrels, fools, or barbarians” deserve those descriptions themselves.
Justice GR Swaminathan said Sanatana Dharma must remain central to one’s heart while serving in public roles, stressing that character goes beyond professional skill. He added that with four and a half years of service left he aims to excel.
The Madras High Court warned Madurai district officials it may initiate contempt proceedings for failing to follow court orders on Karthigai Deepam lighting at Thiruparankundram hill. “Unforgivable! Unless They Apologize in Writing,” said Justice GR Swaminathan.
The Madras High Court stayed the release and circulation of a Tamil book allegedly making personal and derogatory attacks on Justice G.R. Swaminathan, observing that such publications raise serious concerns for judicial dignity and institutional authority.
The Madras High Court expressed concern over the “scandalously high” fees paid to some government law officers and senior advocates in Tamil Nadu. Justice G.R. Swaminathan stressed that public money must be used responsibly and called for better governance in legal appointments and payments.
Justice GR Swaminathan questioned Senior Advocate Vikas Singh over reported remarks suggesting the judge had political ambitions during the Thiruparankundram lamp-lighting contempt hearing. The Madras High Court also sought an explanation from the State Chief Secretary over alleged non-compliance with court orders.
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh criticized Justice G.R. Swaminathan’s order allowing a Deepathoon lamp at Thiruparankundram during Karthigai Deepam, arguing it created a religious right without scripture, history, or legal basis, and threatened public order.
