SC Mandates Apology from Lawyer in Contempt Case for Scandalous Remarks against Delhi HC Judges

SC Mandates Apology from Lawyer in Contempt Case for Scandalous Remarks against Delhi HC Judges

On Friday, the Supreme Court directed a lawyer, convicted of criminal contempt and sentenced to six months imprisonment for making unfounded and damaging statements about multiple sitting judges of the Delhi High Court and district courts in the national capital, to issue an unconditional apology to the judges he had implicated.

On January 9, the Delhi High Court found the lawyer guilty of contempt of court and handed down a six-month jail sentence along with a ₹2,000 fine. Additionally, the court ordered the lawyer's immediate custody and transfer to the Superintendent of Tihar Jail.

A petition filed by the lawyer was taken up by a bench led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud after it was brought to the court's attention.

The bench, including Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, observed that the Delhi High Court, in its verdict, had provided the lawyer with an opportunity to apologize for the contemptuous allegations made in a plea. However, he responded negatively, affirming his stand and maintaining that he stood by the allegations he had made.

The lawyer's counsel stated that the petitioner was prepared and willing to offer an unconditional apology.

"Before we can consider the request of the petitioner, we direct that the petitioner, if he is so inclined, must file an unconditional apology on affidavit before the judges of the high court and of the district judiciary against whom he had made the allegations," the bench said.

"The police authorities shall arrange for the petitioner to be produced in person before each of the judges before whom an apology has to be filed…," it said.

The bench posted the matter for hearing at 3 PM on January 16.

In its verdict, the high court had noted that since the lawyer who made the contumacious allegations was an officer of the court, it was necessary to check such actions with a "firm hand." The lawyer had filed a plea before a single judge of the high court in July 2022, making allegations of arbitrary, whimsical, or biased conduct against several judges. Importantly, he had explicitly named these judges in his petition.

 

 

 
 
 
Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy