An advocate publishes a pamphlet impuring serious allegations on Judges of High Court. What is the nature of the offence committed by the advocate?
1. Whether imputing publication amounts to misconduct? YES
2. Whether the Appellant is guilty of misconduct? YES
Section 2(c)(i) in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
This problem is related to the 'disparaging and derogatory remarks against a Judge amounts to contempt of Court'. The facts of the instant problem are similar to the following case.
M.B. Sanghi, Advocate Vs. High Court of Punjab and Haryana, AIR 1991 SC 1834, the Appellant, a practicing advocate, uttered certain words imputing motives to the Sub-Judge in refusing to grant the stay. The Sub-Judge submitted a report to The District and Sessions Judge setting out the words uttered by the Appellant, for taking necessary action against him. The District and Sessions Judge setting out the words uttered by the Appellant, for taking necessary action against him. The District and Sessions Judge in turn submitted a report to the High Court. In the contempt proceedings, the Appellant denied having uttered the words mentioned in the report of the Sub-Judge and offered unqualified apology. It has been held that the Appellant was guilty of contempt of Court. Aggrieved by the order of the High Court, the petitioner preferred the appeal before Supreme Court. The attack on the Sub-Judge,disparaging in character and derogatory to his dignity, would vitally shake the confidence of the public in him. The High Court did not accept the apology tendered by the Appellant because the Appellant was addicted to using contemptuous language and making scurrilous attacks on the Judges, and had in an earlier contempt proceeding too tendered an unqualified apology on the basis of which the rule against him was discharged.
In the instant problem, It has been held that the incidents of insubordination and use of improper language towards the Judges are on the increase, the High Court was of the view that the Appellant could not be allowed to get away by simply feeling sorry by way of apology as the easiest way. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the Appellant, a fairly senior advocate,is prone to use disparaging and contemptuous remarks against judges, hence, the apology tendered by the Appellant could not, therefore, be accepted.
0 Comments: