Back
[2009(3) ADJ 621 (FB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
(Full Bench)
BEFORE : JANARDAN SAHAI, V.K. SHUKLA, A.P. SAHI,
VIKRAM NATH AND S.K. JAIN, JJ.
In Re : Smt. SADHNA UPADHYAYA, ADVOCATE .....Applicant
(Criminal Contempt Application No. 21 of 2007, decided on 9th April, 2009)
(B) Contempt of Courts Act, 1971—Sections 2(c), 12(1), 12(1) Proviso and 14—Constitution of India—Article 215—Contempt of High Court—Lady advocate of High Court, found, ex-facie guilty for committing such contempt—Apology tendered by her—Should be unquestionable, sincere, honest and bona fide—Lack of all these factors, make it tainted and deceitful—In the instant case, apology do not touch even feeling of remorse or repentance—High Court after referring to its contents found that contemnor was trying to justify her conduct on strength of traditional practice of mentioning of cases in the High Court—Such conduct goes far beyond traditional practice and precludes her even from getting benefit of her apology—As charges for contempt of High Court stand proved and there is no valid defence—She is guilty for it under Sections 2(c), 12 and 14—High Court imposed sentence of one month’s civil imprisonment—But suspended it on condition that she will not repeat such conduct in future—Several other relevant features—Highlighted. [Paras 42 to 49, 51 to 53, 55 to 59, 61, 62, 68 to 77, 79, 87 and 89 to 94]
(C) Punishment—To an advocate for contempt of High Court—Ex-facie contempt of High Court, committed by advocate—Apology tendered, not showing any repentance—High Court finding that there is no valid defence, imposed sentence of one month's simple civil imprisonment—But suspended its execution on condition that contemnor will not repeat such conduct in future. [Paras 91 to 94]
(D) High Court’s views—On its powers to frame rules for regulating conditions under which an advocate can exercise his right to practice—After referring Advocates Act, 1961, Constitution of India and Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952—High Court felt that Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 need addition of rules, empowering High Court to restrain/debar a lawyer proportionately in accordance with conduct of such lawyer—As such, High Court directed Registrar General to bring it to notice of Hon’ble the Chief Justice, requesting His Lordship to pass appropriate orders on administrative side of High Court, for consideration of framing of such rule—So long as such rules are not framed, law laid down under this judgment shall continue to bind proceedings of this Court. [Paras 105 to 108, 205 to 207 and 209]
(E) Contempt of Court—By an advocate—Role of advocates and Judges in prevention of such happening—Examined and highlighted by High Court—Reminding both that they should be careful about their role in preserving sense of justice by applying standards of justice. [Paras 110, 111, 115, 117 to 119, 121 and 122]
(F) Legal Profession—Senior advocates are real torch bearers for giving direction to their future generations—But they are finding themselves in helpless situation—They should unite with Bench and come forward for preservation of free flow of justice and honour of judiciary, interest of litigants and public faith—High Court emphasised that Bench and Bar should come together for preservation of judicial system and ethical fall in profession—It is the duty of every lawyer to secure justice—They should discharge their duty in real sense as officers of Court. [Paras 168, 173, 174, 176, 180, 181, 190, 193, 194, 197 and 201]
(G) Security—High Court and its property—By indulgence of lawyers in causing damage during agitation—High Court is fully equipped to deal with such situation on its administrative side—State Government should extend its full co-opertation to High Court by making security arrangements. [Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 228]. [Paras 202 to 204]
By the Court.—Long before our Late Prime Minister Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru had within the portals of the Parliament trumpeted the creation of a free Nation in 1947 proclaiming that India was making her tryst with destiny, the Queen Empress Victoria, through a solemn Royal Charter in the year 1866, laid the surest and firm foundations of this institution representing what every free human being desires, the rule and majesty of law in a civilized Society. This acknowledged the supremacy of law to a great extent even in the British ruled dominions that held sway over almost every part of the Globe. This authenticated document which is still preserved in original and housed in the Museum of our Court, heralded a new era of dispensation of justice with new hopes of preservation of the rule of law. The monarchy came to an end and then dawned a new Republic. With the birth of a new nation, we gave ourselves a New Constitution with a pledge to preserve the rule of Law in a new democracy.
2. Holding on to the heritage of a Judicial System with its colonial background and imperial authority, but with a new backbone and with visions that stood enshrined and engrafted firmly therein, this “Indian Magna Carta” also contains Article 215 empowering the Higher Judiciary of the States to punish for contempt. This empowerment is the confidence reposed in this institution by our own people who have given unto themselves the Constitution. Such confidence was thought to be necessarily expressed to aid and support the cherished principle of upholding the Rule of Law and to revere the “sense of justice” that is inherent in every human being. The roots of such pure thoughts travel far beyond our Constitution and the Laws and also the Royal Charter. They are to be found in Manu Smriti and the Srimad Bhagwat Gita, in the Bible and the Quran and even in the documents of Atheists. It has an ethical and philosophical support that has enabled it to survive the test of time.
3. Armed and supported with such eternally firm principles, we are reminded of the indestructibility of this bastion of democracy in the words of Late Pt. Kanahiya Lal Mishra, while delivering his impromptu speech in the presence of Late Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, the then President of India, on the occasion of the centenary celebrations of this Court in 1966, which is quoted below :
“It is a part of the life of a lawyer to be prepared for surprises; and when I was called upon suddenly a few minutes ago to speak on this occasion, I felt that, because what I have to say will not be any different from what others might say, I should not hesitate.
We are today celebrating the lapse of a hundred years. A period of hundred years in the history of the Universe is a speck of dust in the vast expanse of the sky, but in recorded human history a period of hundred years, particularly the period that has passed between 1866 and 1966, is of considerable importance. This period has seen changes so vast that the institutions of a hundred years ago –the institutions that man creates and demolishes—have become almost unrecognisable. Monarchies have tumbled. There have been two world wars. In our own country this period of hundred years began almost with the commencement of the rule of British Crown and that rule had disappeared. It is surprising that the fondness with which man creates institutions, the importance that he attaches to them, the permanency that he attributes to them, are all based upon a lack of foresight. This is because institutions grow out of certain ideas which form the bases of these institutions. In the world of Science, the most amazing discoveries, that appear to open out new vistas of knowledge, become after a lapse of time, outdated and are thrown away on the refuse and rubbish bins of time. Institutions come and go and the history of man changes and all that is held near and dear passes away into the void of eternity. When the greatest scientific truths become outdated and worn ou
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
