J.M.PANCHAL, ABHILASHA KUMARI
SUO MOTU – Appellant
Versus
S. B. VAKIL, ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT – Respondent
( 1 ) THE instant Suo motu proceedings are registered against the respondent in view of the following facts which emerge from the order dated February 17, 2006, passed by the learned Single Judge. When the learned single Judge was hearing Company application No. 239 of 2005. a mobile phone started ringing in the Court. The court saw that keeping mobile phone in hand, the respondent was walking out of the Court. When the Court noticed this the Court called the respondent. According to the learned Single Judge instead of expressing any remorse or regrets, the respondent started saying that he was keeping his mobile phone on vibration mode but as he had to take some medicines, he had set the alarm which went off. The learned Judge noticed that the respondent did not express a word of regret upto that time and when the Court asked him that the Court was likely to issue a notice to him to show cause, he said that it was the choice of the court. Thereupon, the learned Single Judge by an order dated February 17. 2006 directed to issue notice to the respondent calling upon him to show cause as to why he should not be punished under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts
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.