In an era where judicial activism often sees some judges overstepping the letter of the law, the Madras High Court stands witness to a judge who balances justice with empathy. Justice G.R. Swaminathan is known not just for his legal acumen but for his kind heart and humane touch — bringing warmth to the often cold corridors of justice. His judgments may not always appease all parties, and he has faced criticism — even casteist remarks — for decisions that did not align with certain expectations. Yet, undeterred, he continues to deliver rulings that stay firmly within legal bounds while upholding human dignity.
In 2023, Justice Swaminathan heard a petition filed by Sivakumar Chellathurai, seeking to be appointed as the manager of his father P.K.M. Durai’s properties and be granted permission to sell them. The petition was filed under Clause 17 of the Letters Patent, which grants the High Court parens patriae jurisdiction over “minors, lunatics and idiots.” The judge, while noting that such terminology is archaic, acknowledged that these terms still appear in legal texts.
Friends and family of Justice Swaminathan recall his time as a lawyer, stating that he would never take up a case without personally verifying the facts — often by visiting the home of the litigant or a place connected to the dispute. This personal approach, aimed at ensuring justice was fair, morally sound and factually grounded, continues in his current judicial conduct.
In line with this ethos, Justice Swaminathan decided to visit the home of the litigant’s father in Kodambakkam after observing that summoning him to court would cause immense physical hardship. Durai, aged 83, had suffered a stroke in 2021, rendering him speech-impaired and dependent on tube feeding.
To determine Durai’s mental state, as alleged in the petition, Justice Swaminathan took his wife, Kamakshi — a special educator — along for the visit. During their interaction, they learned that the petitioner had also filed a sub-application requesting a direction to his mother, Kousalya, and brother, C. Sabri Kumar, to take Durai to a hospital for follow-up care. The petitioner claimed his father was mentally unsound.
To assess this claim, Mrs Kamakshi wrote the words “hospital” and “home” one below the other on a piece of paper. She told Organiser, “I asked Mr Durai to pick his choice of preference. Due to motor coordination issues, he initially touched the word ‘hospital’. But when the Judge asked if he wanted to be moved to a hospital, Mr Durai began weeping. Seeing this, I rewrote the words ‘home’ and ‘hospital’ on either side of the paper and showed it to him again. This time, he touched the word ‘home’ and gestured that he was comfortable staying there.”
Subsequent conversations with Durai’s wife and younger son confirmed they had no objection to the applicant visiting their home to see his father.
In his order dated June 3, Justice Swaminathan observed, “Due to his physical condition, he was drooling. Whenever he drooled, he used his handkerchief with his left hand to wipe the saliva. When he cried, he used the same handkerchief to wipe his tears. From this, I could clearly and categorically conclude that Thiru P.K.M. Durai suffers only from serious physical debilities. But his mental condition remains rather sound. By no stretch of imagination can Thiru P.K.M. Durai be called a lunatic or idiot.”
He further noted, “I am of the firm view that what Thiru PKM Durai needs now is loving care. If he is shifted to a hospital, he would suffer from loneliness and may end up in an ICU. At home, he is surrounded by his immediate family, including grandchildren. The interests of Thiru P.K.M. Durai are paramount. I am more than satisfied that there is no merit in the application.” However, he refrained from dismissing the plea outright as the petitioner’s senior counsel was not present during the hearing.
Justice Swaminathan’s compassionate gesture drew wide applause — especially in a climate where courts often face criticism for judicial overreach, particularly in high-profile corruption cases or matters involving political leaders and economic offenders. Recently, even the Supreme Court faced backlash for setting time limits for Governors and the President to act on Bills passed by state legislatures — prompting the President to seek legal clarity on 14 constitutional questions.
This incident brings to mind timeless tales of justice. We’ve all read in school about King Solomon resolving the dispute between two women claiming the same child. In Indian tradition, King Vikramaditya and Tamil Nadu’s legendary ruler Ellalan — hailed as Manu Needhi Cholan — epitomise moral justice. The latter is said to have executed his own son to grant justice to a grieving cow whose calf had been killed. He had hung a bell outside his court, allowing even animals to ring for justice.
