Back
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
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:
i. On the 27.02.2006, this Court, acting suo motu, took cognizance of the alleged incident and determined that qua 25 i
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....
The court established that making defamatory allegations against judges constitutes criminal contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, and reasserted the importance of upholding judicial authority.
Judiciary possesses inherent powers under Article 215 to initiate suo motu contempt proceedings, independent of the Contempt of Courts Act, while conduct undermining judicial authority constitutes bo....
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 High Court can take suo motu cognizance of contempt of a subordinate court based on verified information, notwithstanding the absence of a formal reference or motion from the Advocate-General.
The court emphasized the necessity of strict adherence to procedural rules in contempt proceedings, particularly regarding the requirement for clear allegations and the proper initiation of actions u....
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
