Jharkhand High Court Drops Contempt Case Against Advocate After SC Intervention; Says Senior Lawyers Must Show Greater Restraint

On 16 February 2026, the Jharkhand High Court dropped suo motu contempt proceedings against Advocate Mahesh Tewari after accepting his unconditional apology for statements made in open court which were captured in a video clip that later went viral on social media platforms.A Five-Judge Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad, Rongon Mukhopadhyay, Ananda Sen, and Rajesh Shankar was hearing the matter. The contempt proceedings arose out of an incident dated 16 October 2025 in Court Room No. 24 presided over by Justice Rajesh Kumar, where certain statements were made by the contemnor.The contemnor had challenged the High Court's order taking cognisance of the incident before the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 430 of 2026. By order dated 23 January 2026, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal, granting liberty to the contemnor to file an affidavit of unconditional apology before the High Court and requesting the High Court to consider the same sympathetically.Pursuant to the Supreme Court's order, the contemnor filed a supplementary affidavit tendering an unconditional apology and expressing regret for the incident, stating that the occurrence in the courtroom was “unfortunate and regretful.” Taking note of the affidavit and the apology tendered, the High Court extracted portions of his apology wherein he clarified his position:“I would like to clarify that the statement made by me was in the heat of the moment, under emotional distress and was unintentional and not a considered view. I regret using this expression, retract it fully and unconditionally and state that it does not reflect my belief and views regarding the institution of the judiciary. I wish to reiterate I should have chosen my words more carefully and there was no ill intention to either scandalize the court or undermine the majesty and authority of the law.”Accepting the apology, the High Court held that although the contemnor's conduct and utterances in the courtroom were regrettable and did amount to conduct tending to scandalise or lower the authority of the Court, it was nevertheless inclined to accept his unconditional apology after considering the pleadings, transcript, video clip, and the law on contempt. The Court clarified that the apology was being accepted not because the conduct was justified, but because the contemnor had expressed genuine regret.The Bench further underscored that an advocate with over four decades of legal practice is expected to demonstrate a high degree of restraint and responsibility. It observed that an advocate is an officer of the Court and his conduct reflects on the institution itself, not merely the individual judge. The Court emphasised that members of the Bar cannot afford to exhibit disrespect or behave in a manner that undermines the dignity and authority of the judiciary. However, in view of the unconditional apology and the directions of the Supreme Court to consider the same sympathetically, the High Court decided to drop the contempt proceedings. The High Court noted:“,,,More than it hurts us, it harms the institution, which is far greater than the judges and lawyers who are but a part of it. It suggests a kind of bravado that may appeal to some galleries or quarters. But there is a thin, though well-marked line between arrogance and forthrightness that, at least, a seasoned Lawyer with over four decades of practice can afford neither to miss nor to cross.”The Court observed that, given his long standing of over four decades at the Bar, the contemnor was expected to exercise greater restraint and responsibility in future and refrain from any conduct that may scandalise or lower the authority of the Court or interfere with the administration of justice. In view of the unconditional apology tendered by the contemnor and the material placed on record, the High Court accepted his apology and dropped the suo motu contempt proceedings. Case Title: The Court on its Own Motion v. Mahesh Tewari.Case Number: Contempt Case (Criminal) No. 3 of 2025.Appearance: Mr. Mahesh Tiwari appeared in person.Click Here To Read/Download Order

Jharkhand High Court Drops Contempt Case Against Advocate After SC Intervention; Says Senior Lawyers Must Show Greater Restraint

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Rushil Batra

Jharkhand High Court Drops Contempt Case Against Advocate After SC Intervention; Says Senior Lawyers Must Show Greater Restraint

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers