The Allahabad High Court said that instances of the kind in which the advocates show discourteous behaviour towards the presiding judge cannot be tolerated.
The Division Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Gautam Chowdhary heard a contempt application taking suo moto cognizance.
The case arose from an incident on February 3, 2023, during proceedings before the Civil Judge (Junior Division/Fast Track Court) in Kanpur Nagar.
In this case, the contemnor questioned Presiding Officer for having issued non-bailable warrants and also snatched the file from the court’s staff, which was later returned.
Uncalled for comments were also made against the Presiding Officer. Reference is also made to previous proceedings of 14.07.2022 and 22.11.2022, wherein also certain undesirable comments were made against the Presiding Officer.
On issuance of notice, the contemnor/opposite party has appeared and submitted an unconditional apology before the court. On 25.01.2024, the Court permitted the contemnor to appear before the concerned court and furnish an apology by way of an affidavit.
Such an apology was tendered before the court concerned but neither the Presiding Judge nor the Court was satisfied with such apology as in the opinion of the Court no remorse was expressed. The matter was adjourned on the prayer of the contemnor to permit him to submit a fresh apology.
The matter was again taken up on 27.05.2024, wherein a fresh affidavit was filed in the matter. The affidavit before the concerned court was filed, which gave the impression that it was under the orders of the Court that the unconditional apology was submitted.
On September 10, when the matter was taken up, the contemnor was present before the Court and submitted that he shall never ever repeat an act of insubordination before the court and would always behave properly. Remorse is also expressed for the previous acts on which proceedings of contempt have been initiated.
Sharad Kumar Srivastava, counsel appearing for the contemnor states that the contemnor is a young advocate and this is the first instance that an undesirable act has been attributed to him.
Srivastava further submitted that considering the fact that the career of the contemnor might be put in jeopardy, the Court may take a lenient view in the matter.
It is also urged that the contemnor has otherwise appeared thrice before the Presiding Officer to offer his apology.
The Court observed that instances of the kind in which the advocates show discourteous behaviour towards the Presiding Judge cannot be tolerated. The Judges can function only in a cordial atmosphere. Being an Officer of court an Advocate cannot be expected to be either discourteous to the Judge or use intemperate language against the Presiding Officer.
“We were inclined to take a more serious view in the matter, but considering the fact that contemnor is a young advocate and there has been no previous allegation of such conduct on his part, we drop the proceedings by issuing him a strict warning. We, however, make it clear that in the event any such undesirable act on part of the contemnor is brought to our notice the Court shall proceed to revive the proceedings of instant contempt and take serious view in the matter,” the Court said.
A report of the concerned District Judge would be submitted before the Registry of the Court upon expiry of two years with regard to the satisfactory conduct of the contemnor, the order reads.