Back
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Sonia Gokani and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.
Amit Manibhai Panchal —Applicant
versus
Suo Motu —Opponent
Criminal Misc. Application (Direction) No.1 of 2020 in R/Criminal Misc. Application No.8120 of 2020
Decided on 19.8.2020
(A) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Section 15 – Constitution of India – Article 215 – Contempt of Court – High Court India has powers of initiating proceedings of contempt – Such powers are to be exercised very sparingly to upkeep majesty of court and to continue to sustain faith of citizens of this Country in this august institution – Criminal contempt is a matter between Court and contemnor and third party has extremely limited role even when its act is well intended to assist the laudable cause – No one has any statutory right to claim to be an intervener or to participate as complainant in proceedings of contempt which is between court and contemnor – It is exclusively court’s discretion to take into account even material which comes from a reliable source termed to be material to initiate action of contempt whether to initiate action on the basis of such material or not, even if it is found to be prima facie material of contempt – No one can compel court to initiate any action of contempt. (Para 17)
(B) Constitution of India – Article 215 – Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Section 15 – Contempt of Court – Contempt of Court is a special jurisdiction which is to be exercised sparingly with caution – It is only when majesty and dignity of courts is adversely affected, this jurisdiction needs to be springs into action – There is no lis nor any adjudication between parties and it is not to be used to upkeep dignity of Judges in their individual capacities – But, when entire administration of justice is targeted, it becomes imperative for Court to intervene – Any act which has a tendency of shaking confidence of public, cannot be permitted and this Court can exercise by invoking its inherent powers under Article 215 of Constitution of India – Court also cannot be oblivious of need of healthy criticism to have a check and balance in system and right to freedom of speech and to profess profession which are zealously guarded by Constitution of India and all these aspects are going to be regarded while proceeding with Suo Motu contempt proceedings – Directions issued. (Para 29)
Result: Directions issued.
ORDER
Sonia Gokani, J.—The applicant by way of present application seeks to intervene in the Criminal Miscellaneous Application (for contempt) No. 8120 of 2020 or in the alternative seeks permission of this Court to bring to the notice of the Court certain contemptuous utterances at the instance of opponent no.2 so as to enable this Court to take notice while deciding the said contempt application.
2. It is averred that the applicant seeks to play the role of an informant to enable the Court to decide the contempt application by taking into consideration the information supplied by the applicant. The applicant is a member of the legal profession enrolled in the Bar Council of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in the year 1983. He is also a member of Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Association (GHAA).
3. The applicant has preferred Writ Petition (PIL) No. 83 of 2020 and had originally prayed the following reliefs there:
“(A) Be pleased to issue directions for framing of appropriate Rules under the Gujarat High Court Rules, with regard to proper conduct and discipline by members of the legal profession and with regard to any Resolution that may be passed by the Respondent No. 3, in the conduct of matters considering the judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court of India in the case of (1) Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal vs. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 45; (2) Krishnakant Tamrakar vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2018) 17 SCC 27; (3) Mahipal Singh Rana vs. State of U.P., n (2016) 8 SCC 335; (4) District Bar Association, Dehradun vs. Ishwarya Shandilya and Ors., 2020 SCC Online SC 244; annexed at Annexure F Collectively, which are binding under Article 414 of the Constitution of India;
(B) Declare the actions of the Respondent No. 3 of issuing Google Form at Annexure A, WhatsApp Message at Annexure D and the subsequent voting procedure undertaken thereafter as indicated in the Letter at Annexure E as illegal and contrary to judicial discipline and having been undertaken contrary to the Constitution of Respondent No. 3 Association at Annexure I in absence of calling of a General Body Meeting and the Meeting of the Managing Committee of the Respondent No.3;
(C) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this Writ Petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the Respondent No.3, its office bearers, members etc., from passing any resolution and/or taking any action in respect of whether the Honourable High Court of Gujarat can function normally or through Virtual hearing and which subject matter is pending decision before the Honourable Chief Justice and the Honourable Judges of the Honourable High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad and for the purpose of which the Questionnaire at Annexure – C has been issued on 26.05.2020 by the Honourable The Chief Justice;
(D) Pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
4. The applicant herein applied for the amendment in the Writ Petition (PIL) No. 83 of 2020 and proposed to add paragraph nos. 4.14 to 4.22 which has been allowed by the Court (Coram: - Hon’ble The Chief Justice Mr. Vikram Nath and Hon’ble Justice Mr. J.B.Pardiwala) vide order dated 16.06.2020. For the ready reference, the paragraph nos. 4.14 to 4.22 are reproduced hereunder: -
“4.14. It is submitted that besides the events narrated above, Shri Yatinbhai N. Oza, President of Respondent No.3 Association has also written to the Honourable Chief Justice of India n his personal capacity, making scandalous allegations against judges of the Honourable High Court. Annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE – K is a copy of the letter dated 21.03.2020 sent by Shri Yatinbhai N. Oza to the Honourable Chief Justice of India.
4.15. It is further submitted that the conduct of the Respondent No.3 is prima facie contemptuous and done in a manner so as to browbeat the Judges of this Honourable Court and bring the entire institution into disrepute. A Division Bench of
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
