Delhi HC issues show cause notice to lawyer for alleged contempt of court
Jul 22, 2022
New Delhi [India], July 22 : The Delhi High Court recently issued show cause notice to an advocate for contempt of court for raising allegations against a Judge of the Trial Court and High Court as well.
The allegation was raised in an appeal against a final order by the Trial Court in a rape case.
Justice Jasmeet Singh issued show cause notice to the advocate appearing for the victim appellant as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him.
The Court has directed the counsel to file a reply to the notice within 14 days.
The matter has been listed on August 8, 2022, before the division bench handling the criminal contempt petition subject to the orders of the Chief Justice.
The court observed, "There is a direct attack on the reputation and functioning of not only one judge, but several judges of this court. This vilification of Judges can affect the administration of Justice as it becomes a form of public mischief. An unwarranted attack on a Judge, citing and unscrupulous administration cannot be ignored by this court."
"For a healthy democracy, there must be an impartial Judiciary, however, it cannot be impaired by vindictive criticism. The Judiciary is not immune from criticism, but when the criticism is based on distorted facts or gross misrepresentation of material averments, to intentionally lower the dignity and respect of this Court, it must be taken cognizance of," the Court added.
The Court noted that the above-quoted representations and allegations are biased and intended to scandalise this court.
"To make allegations that a Judge deliberately wanted to twist issued in order to favour an accused or that they were personally interested in the matter acted illegally or impartially are unjust statements," Court said.
The Court was hearing an appeal seeking setting aside the final order/Judgement passed on November 18, 2021, by the fast track court at Rohini in a rape case.
During the hearing, the counsel for the respondent and an additional Public Prosecutor drew the attention of the court to the contents of the petition and strongly object to the same.
After reading the content the court had asked the counsel for the appellant to retract those paragraphs and challenge the finding of the Trial Court as well as this court in accordance with the law without making any personal, tainted and mala fide allegation against the judges.
The council had stated that he would not amend the appeal and that it needs to be adjudicated.
The Court said, "A bare perusal of the averments made hereinabove show that they are scandalous and aimed at lowering the dignity and majesty of this court. They have interfered with the administration of justice and amounted to contempt. The allegations made in the petition are intrinsically contentious in nature and fall within the definitions of "Criminal Contempt" of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 under Section 2 (c)(i)."
" I am of the view that notice of contempt needs to be issued," Justice Singh said.
