SC tells Lawyer to Apologise

Quick Brief:

The Supreme Court instructed a lawyer, recently sentenced to six months in prison for criminal contempt due to making "scandalous, unwarranted, and baseless imputations" against various sitting judges in Delhi, to issue an unconditional apology to the targeted judges.

The Delhi High Court had earlier found the lawyer guilty of contempt and sentenced him to imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 2,000, directing his custody to the Superintendent of Tihar Jail. A bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud considered the lawyer's petition, emphasizing that he must file an unconditional apology on affidavit before the concerned judges. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on January 16, with the court urging the petitioner to submit apologies directly to the judges if inclined.

Detailed:

The Supreme Court, on Friday, directed a lawyer sentenced to six months in prison for criminal contempt—due to making "scandalous, unwarranted, and baseless imputations" against judges in Delhi—to offer an unconditional apology to the implicated judges. The Delhi High Court had found the lawyer guilty of contempt on January 9, sentencing him to six months in jail and imposing a fine of Rs 2,000. Additionally, the high court ordered his custody and transfer to the Superintendent of Tihar Jail.

A bench led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud addressed the lawyer's petition, which had been presented to the court. The bench, which included Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, noted that the high court had provided the lawyer an opportunity to apologize for the "contemptuous allegations" in his plea. However, the lawyer had responded negatively, affirming his commitment to the allegations. The lawyer's representative conveyed the petitioner's willingness to tender an unconditional apology.

The bench outlined a prerequisite for the petitioner to file an unconditional apology on affidavit before the judges of the high court and district judiciary mentioned in the allegations. It further directed the police authorities to facilitate the petitioner's in-person appearance before each implicated judge. The bench scheduled the hearing for January 16 at 3 PM.

In its verdict, the high court highlighted the necessity to address such contumacious allegations firmly, considering the lawyer's status as an officer of the court. The lawyer had submitted a plea before a single judge of the high court in July 2022, accusing several judges of arbitrary, whimsical, or biased actions, explicitly naming them in the petition.

Thanks for visiting!