The judgment emphasizes the importance of mutual respect between the judiciary and the bar, and the need to maintain decorum and dignity in court proceedings.

ShylendraKumar, J.

This criminal contempt petition is registered suo-motu by the registry of this Court on receiving a communication dated 17.2.2011 originating from the office of Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chickballapur and through proper channel addressed to the Registrar General of the High Court and the learned Senior Civil Judge and CJM., Chickballapur having made a request for initiating contempt proceedings against the accused-an advocate practicing before that Court, for the reason that certain uttering by the advocate in the open court hall on the 10th of February 2011, are according to the learned Judge who has passed the orders in RA No.31/2011 pending before that court and which uttering was out of passion which reads as under in the said letter:

“1. As Tahsildar was sitting in the Court Hall from 11-00 AM to 5.00 PM, this Court has ordered in his favour.

2. 50% of the Advocates have seen Tahsildar, visiting the chambers of the Judge at 2.30 PM.

3. I have not seen this type of orders made in my entire career of 40 years at the Bar.

4. Government Advocate knew that the orders would be in his favour, hence he has not entered into the Court, Now he is coming (then it was 5.05 PM)

5. He called the clients before me and told that he had told him earlier to take the transfer of the case but you did not do so and as I told, orders have been made in favour of the Government that is appellants.

6. Earlier this Court had ordered for the stay wrongly, and then vacated the stay and now having stayed has done injustice.

7. This Court acts in accordance with Tahsildar.”

Therefore, the learned Presiding Officer of the Court being of the opinion that such words spoken to in the court hall and the conduct of the advocate amount to scandalizing a Court virtually questioning the integrity and honesty of the Judge and that the uttering being directed towards the Presiding Officer and the learned Judge also having indicated as she is rather hurt by such conduct and expression of the advocate, has sent the letter through proper channel for commensurate action in accordance with law, etc.

2. Notice had been issued to the accused and while Registrar General was before this Court on earlier dates as this Court wanted certain clarifications, etc., ultimately issue of summons was ordered by the Court on 8.11.2011 returnable by 21.11.2011.

3. The developments thereafter are indicated as per the orders dated 21.11.2011, 7.12.2011 and 12.12.2011, the first and last orders of which are extracted below:

“DVSKJ & CRKSJ:

21st November 2011

CRIMINAL CCC No.16/2011

The accused Mr Srinivasa, advocate, Chickballapur is present before the Court, Mr. G.S. Bhat, Advocate submits that he has filed power for the accused person.

2. However, both the accused person and the counsel for the accused person complain that except for receiving the summons in Form no.1 issued under Rule 8(ii)(b) directing the accused to appear before this Court on 21.11.2011 and show cause why such action as is deemed fit should not be taken against the person, the summons is not accompanied by any papers either the petition or the annexures as is required in terms of Rule 8(ii)(b) of The High Court of Karnataka (Contempt of Court Proceedings) Rules, 1981.

3. Learned counsel for the accused submits that the accused person is not in a position to show any cause in the absence of understanding as to what is the allegation or what are the facts and circumstances leading to the issuing summons in the contempt petition as nothing else is furnished.

4. It is rather surprising that inspite of the very Rule quoted in the summon in form no.1 indicating that summons should be accompanied by a copy of the petition and annexures of the contempt petition, a summons has originated from the registry of this Court without such petition and annexures accompanying the summons. It only reflects, on the laxity prevalent in the registry of this Court which has been noticed quite of