Gujarat HC Imposes Cost On Applicant/Accused For 'Spitting Openly' During Virtual Hearing [Read Order]

Deprecating such conduct of the accused, the Bench of Justice A. S. Supehia said,

"This Court is not inclined to take up the matter today looking to the conduct of the applicant-accused No. 1."

Further, the Court directed the applicant-accused No. 1 to deposit a cost of Rs. 500/- before the Registry of this High Court on or before the next date of hearing, failing which the matter shall not be taken up for hearing.

The matter has been posted for further hearing on 07.10.2020.

Inter Alia, there have been incidents where Advocates appear for a virtual court in inappropriate dresses.

Taking stern view of the "irresponsible conduct" of an Advocate who was smoking during the course of Court proceedings via video conferencing, the Gujarat High Court on Thursday (24^th September) imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 upon the Advocate.

The Bench of Justice A. S. Supehia observed that the advocates appearing through video conference are required to maintain "minimum dignified decorum" so that the majesty and dignity of the proceedings as well as the Institution are maintained.

Deprecating such conduct of the advocate, the Court said,

"It was not expected from an advocate to be smoking in the car during the Court proceedings. Such behaviour of the advocate is required to be strictly condemned." (emphasis supplied)

In the month of June, the Supreme Court had accepted the apology of an advocate who had made an appearance before the Court, whilst lying on the bed dressed in a T-shirt, and emphasised on the need to maintain minimum court etiquette during court video hearings.

Rajasthan High Court once adjourned a Bail plea on account of inappropriately dressed counsel in a "baniyan" (undervest) during the Video conference hearing.

Recently, the Orissa High Court condemned the practice of lawyers arguing cases through VC from inside vehicles, gardens & while eating etc.

Furthermore, Calcutta High Court had initiated suo motu contempt action against an advocate-on-record for posting on 'LinkedIn' a screenshot of the virtual court hearing of the day when a favourable interim order was passed by the Single Judge while calling for affidavits.

It was observed by the Calcutta High Court that taking a screenshot of the virtual court proceedings is akin to clicking a photograph of an actual court proceeding. However, the contempt proceedings were later dropped with a warning to the lawyer not to repeat such conduct in future.

Click Here To Download Order

[Read Order]