Back
Issues Contempt Notice to Law Secretary Dilip Ghumare for Aggressive Courtroom Outburst
Mumbai, – In an extraordinary turn of events, the has issued a contempt notice to Mr. Dilip S. Ghumare, Secretary and Senior Legal Advisor of the , after he launched into an aggressive, high-pitched outburst in open court. The Division Bench of Justice A.S. Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata held that his conduct constituted ex facie contempt under read with .
The Incident in Court
The matter arose during the hearing of an Interim Application in a long-standing Public Interest Litigation (PIL No. 219 of 2013) concerning the creation of 179 new posts for Fast Track Courts. The Bench had previously passed an order on , and was reviewing an affidavit filed by Mr. Ghumare on . When the Additional Government Pleader, , could not clearly point out which part of a subsequent affidavit dated , stated that these posts were created, Justice Kamal Khata directly asked Mr. Ghumare—who was present in court—to clarify.
The Unwarranted Outburst
Instead of responding to the court's query, Mr. Ghumare launched into what the Bench described as
"an aggressive, high-pitched tone (bordering to shouting),"
blaming the High Court administration for not filling up the 179 posts. The court noted that this was done "before a packed Courtroom" and was a deliberate attempt to scandalize and undermine its authority.
“His against this Court's administration in full public view constituted a upon the dignity and authority of this Court,” the Bench observed.
Contempt Cannot Be Countenanced
The court emphasized that all litigants are expected to maintain decorum, and this expectation becomes imperative when the person is a judicial officer. Mr. Ghumare, a former Principal Secretary and currently a senior officer in the
, was found to have fallen
"far below the standard we would expect."
When the Advocate General sought permission to accept an apology from Mr. Ghumare, the court categorically rejected the idea, stating that such conduct is
"wholly unpardonable and cannot be countenanced."
“A Judicial Officer cannot exhibit such a behavior in open court and thereafter expect a pardon through an apology in any manner or form later,” the court said, citing the 's decision in Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (1995) 2 SCC 584.
Legal Basis and Next Steps
The court directed the Registrar Judicial-II to issue notice under Chapter XXXIV, Rule 9(1) of the , Appellate Side Rules, 1960 (also known as the Contempt of Courts () Rules, 1994), asking Mr. Ghumare to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him. The notice is made returnable on . Mr. Ghumare, who was personally present, of the notice through the learned Advocate General.
Key Observations from the Bench
The court made several strong observations about the conduct of judicial officers:
- “Mr. Ghumare's unwarranted outburst and aggressive demeanor, deliberately displayed in open Court in full public view while attempting to justify the stand in his Affidavits, not only scandalized the Court but undermined and attempted to lower its authority, constituting contempt ex facie .”
- “Such conduct is manifestly unbecoming of any judicial officer and simply outrageous, falling far below the standard we would expect.”
- “Regardless of the substance of the dispute, it does not confer on him the privilege to treat this Court with utter disrespect.”
Implications
The case sends a clear message that even senior judicial officers are not immune from contempt proceedings when they behave disrespectfully in court. The Bench made it clear that an apology cannot be used as a convenient escape route after committing an inexcusable act in open court. The matter will be heard next on , when Mr. Ghumare must respond to the notice.
Case Title:
