HP High Court Calls For Contempt Action Against Litigant Who Accused Magistrate Of Corruption, Says Baseless Allegations Scandalise Judiciary

After a litigant made reckless and unsubstantiated allegations of corruption against a Judicial Magistrate, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice to constitute an appropriate Bench to consider initiating criminal contempt proceedings.

The Court further Observed that baseless accusations against judicial officers amount to an attempt to scandalise the judiciary; the Court held that such conduct, prima facie, constitutes criminal contempt of court and cannot be countenanced. 

Justice Rakesh Kainthla remarked that: “An allegation of corruption against a judicial officer without foundation made recklessly, prima facie, is an attempt to scandalise the judiciary, and amounts to Criminal Contempt of Court. Hence, the matter be placed before the appropriate Bench having roster to take appropriate action, if deemed proper, for making reckless and scandalous allegations against a member of the judiciary”.

Background:

The petitioner, a former employee of Dayanand Public School, had filed a criminal complaint against a school employee alleging offences under Sections 406, 420, 463, 468, 471, 500 and 501 of the Indian Penal Code.

He alleged that irregularities had taken place in the recruitment of a PGT (IP) teacher in 2018, which he had reported to higher authorities. According to him, instead of taking action on his complaint, the school suspended him and subsequently removed him from service after a disciplinary inquiry.

The petitioner contended that the inquiry was not a "proper inquiry" because one of the listed witnesses, Ved Prakash, was never examined or subjected to cross-examination. He further alleged that the respondent later issued an experience certificate falsely stating that he had been suspended and removed from service after a proper inquiry, thereby creating a forged document to harass and defame him. 

The Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint, holding that no cognizable offence was made out and that the petitioner's grievance related to the departmental proceedings, for which an appropriate legal remedy was available. The revisional court affirmed the dismissal, prompting the petitioner to approach the High Court.

The Court observed that the petitioner's entire case rested on the assumption that the departmental inquiry was invalid because one witness had not been examined. However, such issues concerning the legality or propriety of a disciplinary inquiry must be adjudicated before the appropriate forum and cannot be examined in criminal proceedings. 

The Court noted that the petitioner's removal order had never been challenged successfully. Consequently, the assertion in the experience certificate that disciplinary action followed a proper inquiry could not be termed false merely because the petitioner believed the inquiry to be defective.

Since the removal order continued to subsist, the allegation that the experience certificate constituted a forged document intended to cheat or defame the petitioner was held to be devoid of any legal foundation.

The Court also took serious note of the petitioner's conduct in arraying the Judicial Magistrate as an accused before the revisional court and making unsubstantiated allegations of corruption against the judicial officer. Holding that such reckless allegations prima facie amounted to an attempt to scandalise the judiciary and could constitute criminal contempt, the Court directed that the matter be placed before the appropriate Bench for consideration of suitable action. 

Case Name: Ashish Sharma v. Anupam

Case No.: Cr. MMO No.184 of 2026

Decision Date: 08.07.2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order