A division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma convicted advocate Sanjay Rathod of criminal contempt of court; the incident took place on October 30, 2015
Representational Image. Pic Courtesy/iStock
The Delhi High Court recently convicted an advocate who had entered the court in an inebriated state and used abusive and filthy language against a magistrate in the Karkardooma Court as well as threatened her.
ADVERTISEMENT
A division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma convicted advocate Sanjay Rathod of criminal contempt of court. The incident took place on October 30, 2015.
Appearing before a Court in a drunken state is also unpardonable. The same is contempt on the face of the Court, they said.
"A perusal of the language used by the Respondent-Contemnor qua the Judicial Officer would leave no iota of doubt that it would fall in the definition of criminal contempt as defined under the Contempt of Courts Act. The language used by the Contemnor has scandalised the Court and such conduct also leads to interference in the administration of justice. The words spoken are foul and abusive," the division bench said in the judgement passed on August 22
The bench further said, "Moreover, because the Judicial Officer presiding the Court was a lady Judicial Officer and how the Contemnor addressed the said Judicial Officer is completely unacceptable."
The division bench held that appearing before a Court in a drunken state is also unpardonable. The same is contempt on the face of the Court. Thus, this Court does not doubt holding that the Respondent is guilty of criminal contempt.
The High Court has imposed any sentence on the Convict noting that he has already undergone a custody of five months in a related FIR.
"The Court is inclined to punish the Respondent for criminal contempt. However, on these very allegations and happenings, since the Respondent has already served a sentence of over 5 months, further sentence is not imposed on the Respondent. The period already undergone by the respondent herein is held as the punishment for the present criminal contempt," the High Court said.
On 30th October 2015 Magistrate passed an order recoding that the accused owner of the vehicle had appeared before the Court along with Counsel who is now the Contemnor. They were apprised that the matter was adjourned and a date had been given for the matter.
However, immediately thereafter, the Counsel/Contemnor started shouting in the Court and used abusive and filthy language.
After considering the said language which was used by the advocate, a communication was sent by the Metropolitan Magistrate to the High Court on 31st October 2015. Thereafter, the High Court had started hearing a suo moto contempt against the Advocate.
Advocate Vrinda Grover was appointed amicus Curae in this case.
This story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed, agencies. Mid-day accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability, trustworthiness, reliability and data of the text. Mid-day management/mid-day.com reserves the sole right to alter, delete or remove (without notice) the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
