Skip to main content

Case laws of Contempt of Court by Advocates

 


 Derogatory remarks-

M.B. Sanghi, Advocate V. High Court of Punjab and Haryana and Others

The appellant who is a practicing advocate accused and attacked the integrity of the Sub-Judge by saying that he was acting as a contractor of the Municipal Committee and was under the influence of DY. Commissioner during the adjudication. The Sub-Judge reported the matter to the District and Sessions Judge and the District and Sessions Judge submitted a report to the concerned High Court. The High Court in the proceedings found that the behavior qualifies as contempt of court under Section 29(c)(i) of the Contempt of Court Act. The appellate had also done similar kinds of acts in the past. The Court rejected his unconditional apology and sentenced him to two months of imprisonment.

 Criminal Contempt

M.Y. Shareef and Another V. The Hon’ble Judges of the High Court of Nagpur and Others

In this case, the applicant and two of his advocates filed an application for transfer of the case from the Bench to another Bench stating that the Judges were biased and prejudiced and would defeat Justice. The High Court took it seriously and issued notice to the applicant and his advocates to show cause why they should not be committed for contempt of Court for their Scandalizing remarks against the Court. The High Court after hearing passed the order sentencing them to a fine and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two weeks. They appealed the order of the High Court in the Supreme Court and tendered an unqualified apology to the High Court which was accepted. The Supreme Court issued a strong warning for such conduct.

Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India and Another

A Public interest litigation was filed by the advocate and it was stated in the petition that “Thus the working of the Judges are cocktail based on western common Laws and American Techniques, as such unproductive and outdated according to socio-economic conditions of the country.” “This Court has become a constitutional liability without having control over the illegal acts of the government… Thus, the people for whom the Constitution is meant to have now turned down their forces against it which is a disillusionment for fear that justice is a will-o-the wisp”. “This Court is sleeping over the issues like Kumbhakarna”.

The Court held that the allegations made are likely to lower the prestige of the Supreme Court. The Court was of the view that it was a deliberate attempt to lower the prestige of the Court. The Court rejected the petition and issued the process of contempt.


Gobind Ram V. State of Maharashtra

A suit was filed against the appellant who by profession is an advocate, he filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate stating that he wants to transfer the case to some other court because the Magistrate has a friendly relation with the complainant and the Magistrate enjoys the hospitality of the respondent. The Magistrate dismissed the application and submitted a report saying that the remarks lowers the prestige of the Court. The appellant refused to tender an unconditional apology. The Supreme Court found that the allegations made does not amount to contempt of Court and the order passed by the High Court was set aside. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY

  LAW INTERNSHIP AND TRAINEE OPPORTUNITY: LEXIS AND COMPANY, renowned for its excellence in the legal field, is thrilled to announce an exceptional internship and trainee opportunity for aspiring final year law students and newly enrolled Advocates. This highly coveted internship  and trainee opportunity  is a paid position, providing a remarkable platform for career growth and experiential learning in a corporate environment. Eligibility: Only for final year Students and Newly Enrolled Advocates. We are offering a limited number of vacancies, designed for law students and newly enrolled advocates in the dynamic world of the legal profession. This is an immediate joining opportunity, available to candidates who are interested to work in the area of commercial and civil litigation and have interest towards drafting, and legal research. As a team member at  LEXIS AND COMPANY,  you will refine your research and drafting skills while witnessing the meticulous professional conduct expected
Post a Comment
Read more

Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1)

   Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) --- PLEASE READ THE COMPLETE JOB DESCRIPTION BEFORE APPLYING ---   Urgent Hiring for: LAW STUDENTS/CS STUDENTS/ FRESHER LAW GRADUATES/ FRESHER CS. Position: Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) Department: Legal. Firm Name: LEXIS AND COMPANY – LAW FIRM. Location: Janakpuri, New Delhi. CTC: RS 5000/- Per Month. Additional Allowance: All official expenses including travelling allowance for official purposes will be paid from the day 1 of the service with the firm.   We are urgently looking for LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS for the position of Physical Internship & Training Program - Legal (LEVEL - 1) for our Law Firm in Janakpuri, New Delhi.   Eligibility: Mandatory Qualification: Any LAW STUDENTS / CS STUDENTS / FRESHER LAW GRADUATES / FRESHER CS who wants to learn as a beginner. Desired Qualification: Any additional qualification  will be pre
Post a Comment
Read more

The Doctrine of Alternative Danger

  THE DOCTRINE OF ALTERNATIVE DANGER Although the plaintiff is supposed to be cautious in spite of the defendant’s Negligence, there can also be certain situations when the plaintiff is justified in taking some threat where some unsafe state of affairs has been created by way of the defendant. The plaintiff may appear as puzzled or worried through a hazardous state of affairs created via the defendant and to store his man or woman or property, or now and again to store a third party from such danger, he may take a choice risk. The law, therefore, lets in the plaintiff to come across a choice danger to shop by himself from the chance created via the defendant. If the path adopted by him results in some harm to himself, his motion in opposition to the defendant will now not fail. The judgment of the plaintiff, however, is not rash. The position can be defined by means of the case of Jones v . Boyce . In that case, the plaintiff used to be a passenger in the defendant’s train and instruct
Post a Comment
Read more