The Supreme Court disposed of advocate Mahesh Tewari’s plea challenging suo motu criminal contempt proceedings initiated by the Jharkhand High Court, granting liberty to file an unconditional apology and urging the High Court to consider it sympathetically.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court disposed of a plea filed by Advocate Mahesh Tewari, who had challenged the Jharkhand High Court’s order initiating suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against him over a remark made during a court exchange.
The contempt proceedings arose from an incident on October 16, when Tewari allegedly told Justice Rajesh Kumar of the Jharkhand High Court, during a hearing:
“Don’t cross the limit”.
During a hearing involving a widow seeking relief after her electricity connection was disconnected due to unpaid dues of ₹1.30 lakh. Advocate Tiwari was representing the widow and argued that she was ready to deposit ₹25,000 for reconnection.
However, Justice Kumar cited a judicial precedent requiring 50% deposit of outstanding dues, which led to an argument. The matter was resolved after the advocate agreed to deposit ₹50,000.
The dispute intensified after Tiwari’s case concluded. When the court moved to the next matter, Justice Kumar made remarks about the manner in which the advocate argued. The judge also asked the Jharkhand State Bar Council chairman present in the courtroom to take cognizance of Tiwari’s conduct.
Tiwari then approached the bench and said:
“I can argue in my own way… Don’t try to humiliate any advocate… Don’t cross the limit.”
He also said:
“The country is burning with the judiciary… Don’t try to humiliate any advocate.”
Following this, the court issued a criminal contempt notice, leading to the matter being escalated to the Supreme Court.
ALSO READ: Security Rules for Retired Judges?: Allahabad High Court Seeks UP Govt’s Reply
Appearing on behalf of Tewari, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave submitted before the apex court that the remark was never intended to show disrespect to the court or obstruct judicial proceedings.
Dave informed the Bench that the advocate was “extremely repentant” and was willing to tender an unconditional apology before the High Court.
Recording these submissions, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, observed that when an advocate is aggrieved by a contempt notice issued by a High Court, the appropriate course of action is to explain the conduct before the same High Court bench.
“Let him face them… let him explain. If he feels he has done nothing wrong, he should contest it there,”
the CJI remarked.
He criticized Tiwari for seeking relief from the top court after the contempt notice was issued by the Jharkhand High Court.
The CJI said:
“He just wants an order from the Supreme Court to show ‘kya bigaad liya mera’ (you could not do anything against me).”
The court made it clear that Tiwari should apologize if he wishes to resolve the matter, and added:
“If he wants to show his eyes to judges, then he may go ahead. We are sitting here, and we will also see then.”
Justice Joymalya Bagchi, who was also part of the Bench, underlined the importance of maintaining institutional harmony, stating that friction between the Bar and the Bench should not escalate into an issue of professional ego.
He emphasized that such disagreements, across all levels of the judiciary, should be handled with restraint and mutual respect.
Taking note of the willingness of the petitioner to tender an unconditional apology, the Supreme Court disposed of the plea, granting liberty to Mahesh Tewari to file an affidavit of unconditional apology before the Jharkhand High Court.
The apex court also requested the High Court to consider the apology “in a sympathetic manner.”
READ LIVE COVERAGE