A sub-judge in Kerala who had landed in trouble for his social media comments on several issues, including court orders, has chosen to resign rather than face disciplinary action.

Sub-judge of Perumbavoor, S. Sudeep, announced his decision in a Facebook post on Monday: “I resigned today and submitted a one-line resignation letter.”

He sent his letter to the Chief Justice of Kerala High Court that had served him a notice and sought his explanation based on the findings of an inquiry conducted over his social media posts.

Sudeep wrote another post to condole the death of Jesuit priest and tribal rights activist Father Stan Swamy in custody on Monday. “A man who was a judge in his ‘poorvashram’ (previous abode) apologises to that man. The name of the most unfortunate man in this world is Stan Swamy,” Sudeep wrote.

The judicial officer with a massive following on social media for his bold statements didn’t forget to thank the establishment he had served for 19 years. “Thanks to the establishment that gave me an opportunity to serve for 19 years. Thank you, the lamps that shed light along my path,” he wrote thanking Kerala High Court Chief Justice S. Manikumar, several district judges and others.

The high court panel that probed his Facebook posts over a few years had found that Sudeep had violated a 2017 circular that restrained judicial officers from making comments on sensitive matters. The high court had earlier withheld his three increments as part of its disciplinary action.

Faced with possible termination of service over his comments that were found in violation of the circular, Sudeep had on Saturday posted a lengthy take that began with: “The resignation letter is in my pocket. I shall submit it whenever it’s needed.”

He went on to reproduce the five violations cited by the investigation officer who was a district judge.

The first charge is based on his Facebook post in 2017 in which he allegedly hurt religious sentiments by commenting on a Hindu ritual for the departed souls. He noted that the inquiry did not find any offence in his comments.

The second one was allegedly about insulting Swami Ayyappan, the deity of Sabarimala temple, with some remark on his celibacy in 2018. The third comment was one that lauded a 2018 Supreme Court judgment that allowed women of all ages to enter Sabarimala. The allegation was that he hurt the religious sentiments of traditionalists who were against the verdict since entry of women of child-bearing age was prohibited since several years.

The fourth allegation was over commenting on a high court verdict that ordered the removal of flex billboards in Kerala. Sudeep noted that the inquiry commission did not find anything offensive in the social media posts.

He questioned how any of his posts would come under the ambit of the 2017 circular which was found to have been violated.

He said: “How does my supporting court orders and rule of law become controversial and sensitive? As an Indian citizen I am duty-bound to defend court orders and rule of law. Who can say such comments cannot be made on public platforms?”

He even cited an example of what could be construed as a “controversial” statement.

“Kashmir could be controversial for some, not me. If I say Kashmir is an integral part of India it is certainly not controversial. Saying the opposite is, without doubt, controversial,” he posted.