On Tuesday, the Supreme Court rejected the appeal, affirming that the conviction’s determination required no alteration. This decision was based on the appellant’s behavior in the High Court and even in the apex court, which was seen as detrimental to the legal system and obstructive to the administration of justice.
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday has affirmed the conviction of a former army man turned advocate, reinforcing the sanctity of judicial proceedings. This decision upholds a previous ruling by the Delhi High Court, which found the advocate guilty under the Contempt of Courts Act, leading to a sentence of three months of civil imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2000.
The bench, led by Justices Vikram Nath and P.S. Narasimha, reviewed the case but chose not to overturn the High Court’s findings. However, they did modify the sentence to imprisonment until the rising of the court, taking into account the appellant’s advanced age and health concerns. The Supreme Court’s judgment was particularly critical of the appellant’s repeated misconduct in the courtroom. The judgment noted,
“He has had a habit of misbehaving with a Bench which is not agreeing with him. The misbehaviour goes to the extent of casting aspersions and threatening the Judges hearing the matters.”
The origins of the case trace back to an incident on August 16, 2006, when the Delhi High Court observed the advocate threatening a female counsel representing the opposition. The High Court, in its ruling, stated,
“it is unfair for any Counsel to give any threats to the Counsel appearing on the other side, as all of them appear as officers of the Court and assist the Court or their respective clients.”
Following this incident, the advocate filed several applications in the same case, making baseless and reckless allegations against the High Court judges. This behavior led to another Division Bench of the Court initiating suo motu contempt proceedings against him for improper allegations in a writ petition.
In its comprehensive judgment, the Supreme Court pointed out that the High Court had identified about seven instances where the advocate’s conduct was brought under scrutiny in various proceedings. The apex court expressed its agreement with the High Court’s decision, emphasizing the need to protect the dignity and reputation of judicial officers from unfounded and malicious allegations.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is a strong affirmation of the principles of judicial respect and decorum. It underscores the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding the integrity of legal proceedings and the importance of maintaining professional conduct within the legal system. This decision serves as a reminder of the serious consequences of contemptuous behavior towards the judiciary and the legal process.
Also read- The Ease Of Justice: PM Modi At Supreme Court (lawchakra.in)