IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
K.S.Mudagal, Vijaykumar A.Patil
High Court of Karnataka Rep. By The Registrar General – Appellant
Versus
R.Sarvesh – Respondent
ORDER :
K.S. MUDAGAL, J.
The accused is tried in this case on the charge of commission of criminal contempt of Court. The charge against the accused is as follows:
“Taking suo motu cognizance of the letter dated 02.08.2022 and the letter dated 21.10.2022 along with enclosures forwarded by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Mysuru, notice of contempt was issued by this Court on 03.01.2023.
On considering the contentions and the submissions advanced by respondent/accused in our opinion, the conduct of the respondent/accused by filing applications using derogative words, making baseless allegations against the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, Mysuru and interfering with the Court proceedings amounts to criminal contempt as contemplated under Section 2 (c) of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”
2. Exs.C13 and C14/the letters dated 01/02.08.2022 addressed by CW.1/the then Presiding Officer of Labour Court, Mysuru are the one referred to in the charge. In a nutshell under those letters CW.1 reported that the accused with an intention to interfere with CW.1 and his Predecessors in office in adjudicating I.I.D.No.98/2009 which was renumbered as I.I.D.No.22/2016 went on making contemptuous al
The conduct of the accused constituted criminal contempt by making baseless allegations against judicial officers, thereby lowering the authority of the Court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an advocate's conduct of making false, baseless, and mischievous allegations against the court and its judges, thereby scandalizing and loweri....
The court found that making unfounded allegations against judges and judicial officers constitutes criminal contempt, undermining public confidence in the justice system.
Allegations undermining judicial authority and disrupting court proceedings constitute criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The court emphasized the necessity of maintaining judicial dignity and the procedural safeguards required in contempt proceedings, highlighting that failure to frame specific charges violates natural....
Statements made in good faith about a judicial officer do not constitute criminal contempt, promoting open dialogue and criticism within the justice system.
Allegations of bias and pre-judgement against judges, made with the intent to intimidate them, constitute criminal contempt of court.
The court affirmed that public criticisms and unfounded allegations against judges constitute contempt, undermining judicial authority and integrity.
Statements undermining the judiciary and attributing improper motives to judges constitute criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, warranting strict action to uphold judicial authority.
A member of the legal profession must act with integrity and responsibility, and allegations of contempt must be substantiated by clear evidence of willful disobedience to a court order; frivolous co....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.