The Delhi High Court initiated criminal contempt proceedings against Dr. Kapil Kakar over videos allegedly targeting a sitting judge and the judiciary, while directing social media platforms to remove the content, stressing that intermediaries cannot ignore material undermining judicial independence or reputations.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that fair and accurate reporting of judicial orders pronounced in open court does not amount to contempt merely because the order remains unsigned, reaffirming the principles of open justice, press freedom, and transparency in judicial proceedings.
A Singapore court sentenced Byju’s founder Byju Raveendran to six months’ imprisonment for contempt over alleged non-compliance with disclosure orders, while directing payment of legal costs and ownership documents, though Raveendran denied wrongdoing, described the ruling as procedural and announced plans to appeal against it.
The Madras High Court refused to ban the Tamil film Karuppu, observing that portraying judicial corruption and criticising the judiciary cannot automatically amount to contempt, while emphasising that judges are not beyond scrutiny and freedom of artistic expression must be protected in a democratic society.
The Delhi High Court sentenced Gulshan Pahuja to six months’ imprisonment and a Rs 2,000 fine for criminal contempt, observing that he showed “no regret,” continued making scandalous submissions against the judiciary, and was “neither repentant nor deserving of any mercy.”
The Allahabad High Court held that incorrect judicial orders or heated courtroom exchanges between lawyers and judges do not constitute criminal contempt, observing that such incidents neither scandalise the court nor obstruct justice, while dismissing advocate Arun Mishra’s contempt petition.
The Gujarat High Court recommended criminal contempt proceedings against suspended Additional District Judge GR Soni, observing that his allegations against a senior judge amounted to interference with judicial proceedings and obstruction of justice, thereby constituting “criminal contempt”.
The Rajasthan High Court began contempt action against litigant Kamal Rathore and driver Anil Suman for secretly recording proceedings. It said such recording interferes with justice and “lowers down the dignity of this Court,” amounting to contempt proceedings.
Delhi High Court held Hockey India and Bhola Nath Singh guilty of contempt for disobeying orders. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav stressed misunderstanding cannot justify non compliance.
The Karnataka High Court raised serious concerns over sensational media coverage in the Renukaswamy murder case involving actor Darshan. The Court questioned unchecked “media trials” despite an existing gag order and reserved its verdict on curbing such reporting.
