DIPAK MISRA, A. M. KHANWILKAR, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD
TEHSEEN POONAWALLA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
ORDER
Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J.
1. Ms Indira Jaising has moved a Miscellaneous Application seeking the following reliefs :
“a) Issue appropriate order or direction expunging/deleting the remarks made against the counsel for present intervenor/applicant herein that the conduct of the counsel/applicant herein amounted to contempt or prima facie contempt of court, namely the following :
“74. The present case is indeed a case in point. Repeatedly, counsel for the petitioners and intervenors have attempted to inform the court that they have no personal agenda and that they have instituted these proceedings to protect judicial independence. An aura of good faith has been sought to be created by submitting that the true purpose of seeking an inquiry into the circumstances relating to the death of Judge Loya is to protect the district judiciary(…)”
“75.[…] Ms Jaising has joined the fray by requesting that this court to issue contempt notices to the Administrative Committee of the Bombay High Court…”
“76. […] The conduct of the petitioners and the intervenors scandalises the process of the court and prima facie constitutes criminal contempt…”
“78. [...] The conduct of the petitioners
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.