The Allahabad High Court has charged an advocate with criminal contempt for a WhatsApp post alleging bribery by a judge, ruling that such acts scandalize and lower the authority of the judiciary.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: In an order underscoring the sanctity of the judiciary and the consequences of irresponsible social media communication, the Allahabad High Court has framed charges under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, against Krishna Kumar Pandey for allegedly posting a WhatsApp message that accused a judicial officer of taking bribes and fabricating court records.
The decision, delivered by a Division Bench comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava, reiterates that making unfounded allegations against judges is not only defamatory but also amounts to criminal contempt when it tends to scandalize the authority of the courts.
The Case
The contempt proceedings stem from a WhatsApp message posted in 2023 by Pandey in a group consisting of advocates from District Basti, Uttar Pradesh. The message contained serious allegations against a judicial officer—claims that were subsequently deemed scandalous and capable of lowering the authority of the judiciary in the eyes of the public.
Following a reference made by the judicial officer, the High Court initiated suo motu contempt proceedings in 2024. After considering Pandey’s submissions, the Court found sufficient material to formally charge him under Section 12 read with Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Court’s Observations
1. No Prior Permission Required from Advocate General
Pandey’s primary argument was that the High Court could not take cognizance of contempt without the prior consent of the Advocate General. The Bench dismissed this contention, clarifying that courts are fully empowered to take cognizance of criminal contempt on their own motion.
“It is always open to the Court to take cognizance of a criminal contempt,”
the Bench observed.
2. No ‘In-House Procedure’ for Subordinate Judiciary
Pandey also claimed that an in-house procedure existed to investigate allegations against district judges, and that his message should have been treated as a complaint under this mechanism.
The Court categorically rejected this argument, clarifying that no such “in-house procedure” exists for the subordinate judiciary. Instead, judges of the district judiciary fall under the administrative and disciplinary control of the High Court.
“There is absolutely no mechanism of an in-house procedure for inquiring complaints against Judges of the Subordinate Courts,”
the Court stated.“Judges of the District Courts are subject to the disciplinary control of this Court.”
Any complaint against a subordinate judge, the Court explained, is first examined administratively and, if necessary, through a vigilance inquiry. Only when sufficient material is found are formal disciplinary proceedings initiated.
Proceedings and Charges
After examining the WhatsApp message and the circumstances under which it was circulated, the Bench held that the post was a calculated attempt to scandalize and lower the authority of the court.
Accordingly, the Bench framed the following charge:
“That you, Krishna Kumar Pandey… by your act in publishing the following post on the WhatsApp Group on 14.07.2023… committed an act which scandalises and lowers the authority of the Court of the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court-I, Basti… and thereby committed criminal contempt of Court punishable under Section 12 read with Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”
Pandey pleaded not guilty and has opted to defend himself in person, having refused the services of a senior counsel offered by the High Court Legal Services Committee.
The Court has directed that a copy of the charge and supporting documents be served upon Pandey, and the matter is scheduled to be heard and determined on October 9, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. The contemnor has been ordered to appear in person on that date.
Case Title:
In re Krishna Kumar Pandey
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. – 14 of 2024
Read Order:
