Back
Judge's Phone Call Dodged: MP High Court Slaps Suo Motu Contempt on BJP MLA in Mining Scandal
In a strong defense of judicial independence, the has ordered its registry to initiate proceedings against BJP MLA Sanjay Satyendra Pathak from Vijayraghavgarh. The division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf acted on a whistleblower petition by Ashutosh Dixit, flagging Pathak's alleged attempt to improperly contact a sitting judge handling an illegal mining case linked to companies associated with the MLA.
Roots in a Mining Mess: The Illegal Excavation Probe
The saga traces back to , which spotlighted alleged illegal iron ore mining in Jabalpur's Sihora area, including on forest land. Companies like Nirmala Minerals, Anand Mining, and Pacific Export—reportedly tied to Pathak—faced scrutiny for excavations worth over ₹440 crores and ₹80 crores in GST evasion penalties. Petitioner Dixit, a Katni resident, had lodged complaints with authorities but saw little action, prompting the high court plea.
Tensions peaked on
, when
Justice Vishal Mishra
recused himself from the case. In a candid order, he noted:
"Mr. Sanjay Pathak has made an attempt to call me to have discussion regarding this particular matter, therefore, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition."
The matter was then forwarded to the Chief Justice for reallocation.
Whistleblower Strikes: Petition Ignites Contempt Fire
Dixit's fresh urged the court to take judicial cognizance of Pathak's outreach as an interference in justice. Represented by advocates and , Dixit argued it undermined judicial proceedings. Pathak, defended by senior advocate with , faced the bench alongside state counsel and others.
The bench zeroed in on , defining as any act that scandalizes the court, prejudices proceedings, or obstructs justice. No detailed counter-arguments from Pathak are recorded in the order, but the court swiftly found merit in the allegations.
Bench's Razor-Sharp Reasoning: Foul Play
The judges dissected the recusal order and statutory definition, declaring Pathak's conduct
"
... [to] amount to a
."
Drawing directly from the Act, they highlighted how such attempts erode court authority and meddle with due process—core threats to impartial adjudication.
No precedents were cited, but the ruling reinforces the judiciary's zero-tolerance for ex parte pressures, especially from influential figures in politically charged matters like illegal mining.
Key Observations
"Mr. Sanjay Pathak has made an attempt to call me to have discussion regarding this particular matter, therefore, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition."
(Justice Vishal Mishra, order dated in WP 28456/2025)
"“” means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which— (i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court..."
(Section 2(c), , quoted in judgment)
"We areof the view that the conduct of respondent No.7 may amount to a."
(Para 5, judgment dated )
Gavel Falls: Contempt Petition Greenlit, Next Hearing Looms
The court disposed of Dixit's petition with clear directions:
"Registry to register a suo motu
Petition against Mr. Sanjay Satyendra Pathak and list the
Petition before the Court on
."
This move signals serious repercussions if proven—potential fines or imprisonment—while safeguarding judicial sanctity. For future cases, it serves as a stark reminder: no one, regardless of political clout, can bypass courtroom protocols to sway outcomes. The mining probe continues elsewhere, but Pathak's shadow now hangs over contempt court.
