Bombay HC 5-Judge Bench Initiates Additional Criminal Contempt Proceedings Against Lawyer For 'Scandalous' Remarks In Plea Against Judge

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday initiated another suo motu criminal contempt of court case against advocate Nilesh Ojha, who made 'scandalous and scurrilous' allegations against a sitting judge, while defending himself in another criminal contempt of court case, which was initiated by a five-judge bench for levelling similar allegations against the same judge. For context, suo motu criminal contempt proceedings were initiated against Ojha in April this year, for making 'scandalous and defamatory' allegations against Justice Revati Mohite-Dere and former Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyay (now Delhi HC CJ). Defending himself in that case, Ojha filed an interim application and prayed for impleading Justice Mohite-Dere as a respondent to the initial contempt proceedings. He even made several allegations against the judge, accusing her of being biased against the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and favouring the party in which her sister Vandana Chavan holds a position. He even accused the judge of perjury, forgery etc and manipulating court records.Scandalising choice of language in interim applicationHowever, the interim application filed by Ojha seeking to discharge him was criticised by the five judge-bench headed by Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar of the High Court for the 'choice of words' and the 'language' used in the said application, which the judges held was defamatory and made to scandalise the Court in such a way as to create distrust in the people's mind and impair the confidence of the people in the Court and the Judge. "This is not mere writing of scandalous, scurrilous and contemptuous expressions in this Interim Application which constitutes criminal contempt but the act, conduct and endeavor of the applicant-contemnor (Ojha) to create a general dissatisfaction in the minds of people about the judicial determination by 'X' (the judge) also prima-facie seem to obstruct the administration of justice. The scurrilous attack on the integrity and honesty of 'X' is calculated to cause irreparable harm to the reputation and character of 'X' who was seized with a case on the judicial side," the bench said in the order. The bench also comprising of Justices Mahesh Sonak, Ravindra Ghuge, Ajay Gadkari and Burgess Colabawalla, strongly objected to the prayer made in one of the applications to immediately withdraw judicial work from Justice Mohite-Dere. "It seems to us that by filing this Interim Application, the applicant-contemnor intended to cause embarrassment to 'X' and to deter her from discharging her judicial functions. The expressions used in several paragraphs of this Interim Application are disparaging in character and derogatory to the dignity of 'X' who is a sitting Judge of this High Court. The use of such expressions against a sitting Judge of this Court prima-facie tends to scandalise the authority of the Court. The personal attack on the impartiality and fairness of 'X' while discharging judicial functions are a direct attack on the character of 'X' and prima-facie causes prejudices and intends to interfere with the judicial processes," the five-judges observed. Statements tend to interfere with administration of justiceFurther, the judges prima-facie, opined that the statements made in the instant Interim Application tend to interfere with the proper administration of law and justice. The derogatory statements made against a sitting Judge of the Court offend the dignity of the Court and are calculated to undermine the confidence of the public in the integrity of the Judge. The act of making wild allegations against 'X' in this Interim Application is squarely covered under the definition of and constitutes “criminal contempt," the bench held. The five-judges further observed that it is the obligation of every person and rests more upon the members of the Bar that a Judge is not attacked in a veil of fair criticism in a manner which would create distrust against the Judge in the minds of the public or a section of the society. It would erode public confidence in the judicial system and undermine the authority of the Court if the courts ignore the conduct of a person designed to or suggestive of creating unnecessary controversy in the Court. "Every litigant has a right to present his case by all fair and honorable means but he must exercise restraint in using intemperate language in the pleadings and/or during arguments in the Court. When the conduct of an advocate tends to bring the authority and administration of the law into disrespect and disregard, it amounts to scandalizing the Court and must be held as undue interference in the administration of justice. Every Court of record has the power of summarily punishing for contempt," the bench underscored. The judges said that Ojha's conduct in attempting to castigate the character of the sitting judge did not seem to be in the exercise of the 'right of fair and reasonable criticism.'"The applicant-contemnor who is an advocate by...

Bombay HC 5-Judge Bench Initiates Additional Criminal Contempt Proceedings Against Lawyer For 'Scandalous' Remarks In Plea Against Judge

Narsi Benwal

Tags