Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

Bihar Court Denies Bail To Advocate Who Allegedly Abused Former CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Judges Of Patna, Jharkhand HCs On Social Media

Sparsh Upadhyay
25 Jan 2022 7:51 AM GMT
Bihar Court Denies Bail To Advocate Who Allegedly Abused Former CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Judges Of Patna, Jharkhand HCs On Social Media
x

A Bihar Court has denied bail to an advocate who has been booked for allegedly abusing former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, Patna High Court judges, and former Union Law Minister on Facebook and Youtube."The petitioner (bail applicant/accused-advocate), by his repeated acts and conducts has committed acts which were capable of causing fear or alarm to the public and were capable...

A Bihar Court has denied bail to an advocate who has been booked for allegedly abusing former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, Patna High Court judges, and former Union Law Minister on Facebook and Youtube.

"The petitioner (bail applicant/accused-advocate), by his repeated acts and conducts has committed acts which were capable of causing fear or alarm to the public and were capable of inducing the public to commit an offence against the state and public tranquility," the Additional Sessions Judge, Patna remarked as it denied him bail.

The case in brief 

A bail petition on behalf of the advocate-accused (Dinesh Singh) had been filed before the Court submitting that he is in judicial custody since December 16, 2021 in connection with a case registered against him for offences U/S 201, 504, 505 of I.P.C. and 66, 67(c) of IT ActSections 505 of I.P.C. and 66 and 67 of the IT Act.

This case has been registered against him pursuant to the orders of the Patna High Court. Read more about the order here: Judiciary Can't Be Threatened By Misdirected Individuals: Patna HC Directs FIR Registration Against Advocate Accused Of Abusing Judges

As per the FIR, it has been alleged that the accused-advocate repeatedly used abusive language against high dignitaries like Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India, The Chief Justice of Patna High Court, The Chief Justice of Ranchi High Court, other Hon'ble Judges, The Law Minister, and various other dignitaries on Facebook and Youtube.

Further, it has been alleged that he committed the offences repeatedly from 25.03.2018 till the time of filing of the case and he did so knowingly because he is an experienced advocate and can not be said to be unaware of the consequence of his utterances and the provisions of law.

Lastly, it was alleged that his uttreneces were capable of causing fear or alarm to the public and were capable of inducing the public to commit an offence against the state and public tranquility.

Court's order

The Court perused the Case diary and noted that police had found that the petitioner had repeatedly used abusive language against the Court, Union Law Minister, and the members of Parliament and Legislative Assemblies and he also tried to delete the posts with a view to causing the disappearance of evidence.

"Being an advocate and an officer of the court and therefore a complementary part of the grand institution of justice delivery, he was not only under a greater obligation to abide by the dictums of law and to show restrain and a balance in his opinions and words but also to uphold the majesty of towering institutions like Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble High Courts as well as the highest offices like those of the Union Law Minister, Advocate General etc. He ought to have been cognizant of the fact that his repeated posts and utterances had the capabilities to erode the trust of public in these institutions of highest degree and repute," the Court added as it noted that there is enough evidence to support the allegations mentioned in the FIR.

The Court also stressed that Apex Court and High Courts have been commanding the highest respect and trust of the public by their actions throughout history and that on numerous occasions, they have cFacebookome up as saviors of democracy and human rights in India.

Therefore, the Court added, any erosion or breach of trust of the public in the highest institutions of democracy would not only invite breach of public peace or tranquility but may also result in an unprecedented rebellion which may be catastrophic to the very social and constitutional fabric of the nation.

With this, the Court refused to grant him bail.

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Next Story