Case Title: Court on its own motion v. Virendra Singh Advocate
Case No: CONT. CAS. (CRL) 4 of 2022
Decided on: 9th January, 2024
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT AND HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
Facts of the Case
The lawyer’s appeal came up for consideration before the individual judge on July 14, 2022. At that time, the judge took note of the accusations levelled against judges from both the Trial Court and High Court in the legal documents. Consequently, the judge issued a notice to the lawyer, prompting him to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated.
The individual judge remarked that while the Judiciary is open to criticism, such critique should not rely on distorted facts or substantial misrepresentation of crucial assertions with the intention of deliberately diminishing its dignity and esteem.
The lawyer affirmed his adherence to the allegations made against the judges, asserting that they openly favoured the accused individuals.
Issue
Whether the contemnor/respondent has made contumacious allegations in the appeal making scandalous, unwarranted and baseless imputations against the learned Judges of this Court as well as District Courts who have been discharging their judicial function?
Court’s analysis and decision
The Delhi High Court has issued a six-month jail term to a lawyer, having determined him guilty of contempt of court. The charges stemmed from his submission of a criminal appeal on behalf of a rape survivor, wherein he made “contumacious allegations” and “scandalous imputations” against judges of both the High Court and District Courts. A division bench, comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Shailender Kaur, has ordered the lawyer to serve a simple imprisonment of six months in Tihar jail, coupled with a fine of Rs. 2,000.
The court emphasized that when an Officer of the court includes such assertions in legal pleadings, the gravity of the matter intensifies. Consequently, it is imperative for the Courts of justice to address such conduct decisively, as failure to do so may lead to harmful repercussions.
“In light of the aforementioned facts, we firmly believe that the respondent/contemnor has violated the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Consequently, we find him guilty,” declared the court. The bench also afforded the lawyer a chance to apologize for the contemptuous allegations presented in the criminal appeal. However, he declined to do so in his response.
The court, after reviewing the evidence and the contemnor’s statements, concluded that he showed no remorse for his behaviour. The bench instructed the relevant Station House Officer (SHO) to assign police officials to accompany the lawyer to his residence to address his requests. Subsequently, he would be taken to Tihar Jail. The court further directed the jail authorities to permit the contemnor to access his regular medications, including eye drops and medicine for a gall bladder stone, while in custody.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Afshan Ahmad
