Re: To Consider Suo Motu Contempt of Court vs Proceedings Against The Tis Hazari Court Lawyers

Breaking News

Back Next

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 3515

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
Re: To Consider Suo Motu Contempt of Court – Appellant
Versus
Proceedings Against The Tis Hazari Court Lawyers – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Senior Advocate as Amicus Curiae along with Ms. Shubhangi Jain, Mr. Yash Giri, Mr. Raju and Mr. Adityaa, Advocates, for the Petitioners.
1) Mr. Rajiv Khosla, Contemnor/Respondent No.1 in-person.
2) Mr. Jagdeep Singh Bakshi, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Praveen K. Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Sanjeev Nasiar, Contemnor/Respondent No. 2 in-person.
3) Mr. N. Hariharan, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Prateek Bhalla, Mr. Rahul Sambher, Ms. Adeeb Ahmed, Mohd. Qasim Ms. Punya Rekha Angara, Advocates for Mr. Jaiveer Singh Chauhan Contemnor/Respondent No.3 in-person.
4) Mr. A.K. Gupta, Contemnor/Respondent No.4 in-person.
5) Mr. Dharmavir, Contemnor/Respondent No.7 in-person.
6) Mr. Inder Singh Saroha, Contemnor/Respondent No.8 in-person.
7) Mr. Sudhir Kumar Singh, Contemnor/Respondent No.9 in-person.
8) Mr. Sunil Sherawat, Contemnor/Respondent No.12 in-person.
9) Mr. Vikas Arya, Contemnor/Respondent No.17 in-person.
10) Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Contemnor/Respondent No.21 in-person.
11) Mr. Anil Kumar Chauhan, Contemnor/Respondent No.22 in-person.
12) Mr. Madan Lal Gupta, Contemnor/Respondent No.24 in-person.

Headnote: Read headnote

JUDGMENT

Siddharth Mridul, J. The present criminal contempt proceeding emanates from the incident that occurred on the 24.02.2006 at the Tis Hazari Courts, in addition to earlier incidents stated to have taken place commencing from the 02.01.2006 at the Tis Hazari and the Rohini Courts, where advocates went on strike, opposing the establishment of the Rohini Court complex. On 24.02.2006, a comprehensive report was forwarded to this Court by the then District & Sessions Judge, Mr. S.N. Dhingra, highlighting the need for initiating suo motu contempt of the Court proceedings against the errant advocates, which included numerous supporting documents, as well as reports from other Judges and officials functioning at the Tis Hazari Courts. In view of the shared nature of the facts and issues involved, both of these petitions were adjudicated collectively and are being disposed of by way of this common order.

2. A conspectus of the facts giving the background of the aforesaid incidents relevant for the adjudication of the subject proceedings are encapsulated herein below

Click Here to Read the rest of this document