Gujarat High Court Recommends Contempt Action Against Judicial Officer For Assertions Made Against HC Judge
The Gujarat High Court has recommended initiation of contempt proceedings against an additional district judge who alleged in his written submissions asserting that a senior high court judge has "good control over all the branches of the High Court" and that he has "control of his junior judges".
This the court said is an act which scandalizes and lowers the authority of the Court and thus the high court directed that the matter be placed before the concerned bench which has the contempt roster for further proceedings.
The court while dismissing the judicial officer's writ petition challenging departmental inquiry over allegations of misconduct, noticed that while normally the matter would have ended at dismissal however it was constrained to consider the conduct of the petitioner after judgment was reserved in his writ petition.
A division bench of Justice NS Sanjay Gowda and Justice JL Odedra in its order, while taking note of the written submissions filed by the petitioner in the matter, observed:
"On 15.4.2026, as stated earlier, the judgment was reserved after hearing the learned Senior counsels appearing for the petitioner as well as for the High Court. At the time of reserving the judgment, it was noticed by this Court that though a reference was made to two writ petitions filed by the petitioner before the Supreme Court, however the pleadings were silent as to what were the prayers that had been sought for in the said petitions. Learned Senior counsel was therefore, called upon to furnish the copies of the writ petitions that had been filed before the Supreme Court in order to ascertain the prayers that were made therein.
In the guise of complying with this oral observation, the petitioner, bypassing his advocate on record and the learned senior counsel who had argued on his behalf, has proceeded to file his written submissions and along with which, he has enclosed two writ petitions that were filed before the Supreme Court. This written submission has been submitted to the Court Master directly by the petitioner and it contains the signature of only the petitioner and is also supported by his affidavit. It is, therefore, clear that the petitioner, a serving Additional District Judge, has chosen to make a statement which he believes to be true and correct to his knowledge and belief. As could seen from the averments made in para-2 of the written submission, the petitioner seeks to scandalize the Court. He is asserting that a senior judge of this Court has good control over all the branches of the High Court and it is his belief that this senior judge is capable of instructing or directing his junior judges. In our view, this assertion by an Additional District Judge against a senior judge of this Court and imputing that the senior High Court Judge has control of his junior judges and is capable of instructing and directing his junior judges is clearly an act which scandalizes and lowers the authority of the Court".
The court said that it would also amount to an act which tends to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceedings and also tends to obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner. In other words, the bench said, "these assertions clearly constitute a criminal contempt".
"We are, therefore, of the view that the papers insofar as it relates to initiation of criminal contempt for the assertions made in para 2, be placed before the Division Bench who is assigned the roster of contempt matters to initiate further proceedings, if it so desires. The writ petition is DISMISSED subject to the above direction to place the papers before the Division Bench assigned the Contempt roster to consider taking action, if it deems fit, in respects of the assertions made in para 2 of the Written submission on affidavit. The matter shall be listed on 15/6/26 and petitioner shall be personally present before the Division Bench on that day," the court said.
The petitioner had approached the high court seeking quashing of the departmental inquiry that has been initiated against him. He had also made the prayers for reinstatement, transfer of inquiry to a Senior Judge and also for quashing of the order of suspension.
With respect to the main matter, the court rejected the petitioner's argument that no departmental inquiry can be initiated unless there is a written complaint, a sworn affidavit and verifiable material.
"It is to be reiterated that the power of the Disciplinary Authority to initiate an inquiry against its employee on the formation of an opinion cannot be made subject to the requirement of there being a written complaint and a sworn affidavit as it would run counter to the statutory Rule. It would be entirely at the discretion of the Disciplinary Authority to initiate an inquiry and form its opinion on the basis of the information that it may have received from various sources," it said.
The court also rejected the petitioner's argument that the charges laid against the petitioner are vague and, therefore, the proceedings are to be quashed. It said that if the grounds are indeed vague, it would always be open for the petitioner to raise this contention before the Inquiry Officer and make his submission good before the Inquiry officer. If he fails, then he can make the submissions good before the Disciplinary authority.
The argument regarding the vagueness of charge cannot be entertained at this stage i.e., at the stage where the the inquiry is already in progress the court added.
It said that it is for the Inquiry Officer to determine on consideration of the material placed before him and consider whether the charges were vague and it is not for the High Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to examine this issue.
The matter is ordered to be listed before the concerned bench on June 15.
Case title: X v/s HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT THROUGH REGISTRAR GENERAL
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5112 of 2026