Supreme Court Issues Criminal Contempt Notice To Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association President

On a plea filed by the Bar Council of India, the Supreme Court yesterday issued criminal contempt notice to Advocate Dhanya Kumar Jain, the President of Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association, Jabalpur.

As per BCI's writ petition , Dhanya Kumar Jain had written a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Jabalpur levelling false allegations against BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra and the High Powered Election Committee headed by retired Supreme Court judge-Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia.

In connection with eligibility of Bar Association office bearers to contest State Bar Council elections, Jain had also apparently made remarks in his letter against CJI Surya Kant. Among other things, he had cast aspersions on CJI's appointment of Justice Dhulia as the Committee head, accused the CJI of harboring ill-will against him and questioned the CJI bench's order for women reservation in Bar bodies as "misuse of judicial seat".

Furthermore, Jain questioned in his complaint the Supreme Court's decision to not direct registration of FIR against former Delhi High Court judge- Justice Yashwant Verma, who got embroiled in a controversy after a huge pile of cash was alleged to have been found at his residence pursuant to a fire incident. The complaint claimed that the same was a "heinous crime by the judiciary of the country" against democracy of the country.

In this backdrop, a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi passed the contempt notice order, after hearing Senior Advocate Guru Krishna Kumar (for BCI), who contended that what had transpired was "absolutely unfortunate" and warranted some sort of action.

"This is the restraint of a leader of advocates?", commented Justice Bagchi. The bench issued notice to Dhanya Kumar Jain to show cause as to why -

- Criminal contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act be not initiated against him?

- Why his Bar license be not suspended?

- Why he shall not be removed from the post of office bearer of the Bar Association?

Although BCI prayed for a direction to the State to not take action on the complaint made by Dhanya Kumar Jain, the bench refused to pass an ex-parte order. "Let him appear...we still hope that some better sense will prevail. After all, advocates are advocates. But when we find that there is no scope of any sense, then we also know how to deal with senseless people", CJI said.

Appearance: Senior Advocate Guru Krishna Kumar alongwith AoR Radhika Gautam (for BCI)

Case Title: BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA Versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS., W.P.(Crl.) No. 157/2026