Back
Holds Protesters And Political Leader Guilty Of Under Contempt Of Courts Act
In a stern verdict delivered on , the ’s Special Division Bench, comprising Hon’ble Justice Arijit Banerjee, Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj, held several individuals—including prominent political figure Kunal Ghosh—guilty of . The proceedings stemmed from a volatile protest on , that severely disrupted the judicial process and scandalized the reputation of the High Court.
Unprecedented Disruption at Kiran Sankar Roy Road On , a large assembly gathered near the at Kiran Sankar Roy Road, blocking public thoroughfares and restricting the movement of advocates and litigants. The mob, claiming to represent aggrieved recruitment candidates, engaged in acts of , hurled vulgar abuses, and publicly desecrated photographs of a sitting High Court judge.
Following a mention by concerned advocates, the Hon’ble Chief Justice initiated
contempt proceedings, noting that the incident constituted a
"clear interference to the
and a threat meted out to the Judiciary."
Challenges and Arguments The alleged generally argued that their actions were a result of "pent-up frustration" and financial insecurity due to the delay in their employment following various court-ordered stays. They offered unconditional apologies to the Court, seeking to escape punitive measures.
Conversely, Kunal Ghosh, through his counsel, challenged the of the proceedings, arguing that they were initiated based on private complaints without the formal consent of the Advocate General, as required under . He further maintained that he was not physically present at the protest site and that his press conference comments were merely a political response to the conduct of certain advocates associated with opposition parties.
Judicial Analysis: The Majesty of the Law The Court overruled the jurisdictional objections, asserting that the ’s power to punish for contempt is an under , and is not merely limited by the statues of the Contempt of Courts Act.
The Bench emphasized that the "slap and say sorry" approach to legal transgression is unacceptable. Regarding Kunal Ghosh, the Court noted that his remarks publicly attacking the impartiality of the judge and imputing motives for the judicial orders were clearly calculated to undermine public confidence in the judiciary, thereby committing .
Key Observations
The judgment highlighted the importance of
:
*
"The foundation of our system which is based on the independence and impartiality of those who man it will be shaken if disparaging and derogatory remarks are made against the presiding judicial officers with impunity."
*
"A court’s power to punish for contempt is not a personal protection for the judge, but a protection for the public whose interests are affected if the authority of the court is lowered."
*
"True apology and justification of the contemptuous act/conduct cannot go hand in hand... one who seeks to justify his conduct cannot be permitted to get away by tendering apology as a second line of defence."
Final Verdict and Sentencing The Court proved unmoved by the inconsistent apologies tendered by the . * Protesters ( 1-7): Found guilty and each fined ₹1,000, payable within four weeks, with a default sentence of three days simple imprisonment. * Kunal Ghosh (Contemnor 8): Found guilty for his public statements scandalizing the judiciary and fined ₹2,000, with a default sentence of three days simple imprisonment.
The High Court remains firm that while fair criticism is permitted, scurrilous attacks on judges based on political convenience threaten the
"very structure of ordered life."
This ruling serves as a poignant reminder that the legal process must remain free from external intimidation to ensure the fair
for all.
