"Apology Not Bonafide", Bombay HC Rejects Apology Offered By Lawyer Who Was Punished For Contempt [Read Order]
The Bombay High Court, Nagpur bench, rejected the apology offered by lawyer Satish Uke, who was punished for contempt of court for filing a petition with "wild and unsubstantiated allegations" against sitting judges and practising lawyers.
"The point is whether the apology tendered by the contemnor is unconditional and can be accepted in the facts of the case. The answer would be an emphatic "No". Though the contemnor has stated that he is tendering unconditional apology, his conduct does not substantiate it. The contemnor has nowhere undertaken that he will not repeat the acts/mischief again. During the course of hearing of this application also the conduct of the contemnor was not proper", observed the order passed on January 23 by the bench of Justices Z A Haq and V M Deshpande.
He was found guilty for contempt of court and punished with simple imprisonment for two months and fine of rs.2000 on February 28, 2017, after taking suo moto case against him for "filing fake, frivolous and vexatious cases with allegations to scandalize the Court and the officers of the Court"
Though the order was challenged in the Supreme Court, it dismissed the appeal on August 8., 2017, observing "Contempt, rather repeated acts thereof, is ex facie apparent".
Later he filed a review petition in the Supreme Court, undertaking to tender unconditional apology before the High Court and withdraw all allegations made by him. On February 7, 2018, the Supreme Court permitted him to move the High Court for apology.
On the basis of permission granted by Supreme Court, Uke filed an application tendering apology, which has been now rejected by the HC.
The HC noted that the grievance expressed by the Additional Public Prosecutor that Uke was adopting "brow beating tactics" by filing applications in the Prosecutor's Office seeking information as to who had given instructions to the Prosecutor regarding the criminal cases registered against him.
The Court further recalled that Uke had filed applications at earlier stages seeking recusal of two judges- Jsutices Varale and Haq- from hearing the matter.
"We have not been able to convince ourselves to accept the apology tendered by the contemnor, as we find that the apology is not unconditional and in fact, it cannot be said to be an apology at all", observed the court while dismissing the application.
Uke filed a petition last November in Nagpur bench alleging that Judge Loya died of radio isotope poisoning.