Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.S.SUPEHIA, R.T.VACHHANI
Suo Motu – Appellant
Versus
Anand H. Goswami – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.S. SUPEHIA, J.
1. On 30/07/2025, this Court has passed the following order:
“1. On 16.07.2025, we had clarified that no further time shall be granted in the present suo motu proceedings.
2. This Court had registered the suo motu proceedings under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. In view of the communication dated 02.09.2013 addressed to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of this Court, wherein the respondent-Contemnor had made reckless allegations against the then sitting Judge, Hon’ble Ms.Justice S.G.Gokani, the following order was passed on 29.11.2013, which reads thus:
“From the communication addressed by the respondent herein-Mr. Anand H Goswami, under trial prisoner 721 /13, Central Jail, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad dated 02.09.2013, addressed to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, we are prima facie of the opinion that the language used and the averments made by the respondent in the said communication against the Hon’ble Ms. Justice Sonia Gokani are contemptuous and for which it can be said that the respondent is liable for criminal contempt.
Hence, Registry is directed to issue notice upon the respondent, making it retunable on 26.12.2013, calling upon the responde
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 maintaining judicial dignity and the procedural safeguards required in contempt proceedings, highlighting that failure to frame specific charges violates natural....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the limitation prescribed under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act is to be scrupulously followed, and the powers under Article 215 of t....
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
