The Delhi High Court has sentenced a lawyer to six months imprisonment after holding him guilty of criminal contempt of court for making ”scandalous, unwarranted and baseless imputations” against several sitting judges of the high court and district courts here in a plea filed in July 2022.
On being given an opportunity by the high court to apologise for the contemptuous allegations made by him in his plea, he refused to do so and stuck to his remarks against the judges of the Delhi High Court and the district court and the judiciary.
The court noted that since the accused who made the contumacious allegations is an officer of this court, it was necessary to check such actions with a ”firm hand”.
“Consequently, we hereby sentence him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months with a fine of Rs 2,000 and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment of 7 days,” a bench of justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna said in an order passed on Tuesday and made available on Wednesday.
The bench directed the police officials to take the lawyer into custody and hand him over to the Superintendent of Tihar Jail here. He asked the court registry to prepare his arrest warrants.
At the request of the man, the high court allowed him to go home, change clothes, drop his vehicle there and bring his medicines to be taken to the jail and also asked the police officials to accompany him.
The man had filed a plea before a single judge in July 2022 in which he accused several judges of acting arbitrarily, whimsically or in a biased manner. He also named the judges in his petition.
When the single judge asked the lawyer whether he would like to retract these allegations, he replied in the negative claining that these were not contemptuous allegations but statements of fact.
The single judge had then issued a notice of contempt to the man and directed that the matter be placed before the division bench concerned.
The division bench heard the lawyer and held that the contemnor had made contumacious allegations in the plea, making scandalous, unwarranted and baseless imputations against the judges of this court as well as district courts who have been discharging their judicial function.
“Moreover, being an officer of this court making such averments in the judicial pleading are more serious in nature. It is incumbent upon the courts of justice to check such actions with a firm hand which otherwise will have pernicious consequences,” the bench said.
It added, “In our considered opinion, the respondent/ contemnor has committed contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, accordingly, we hold him guilty.”
