The Delhi High Court has ordered a lawyer to provide pro bono legal services in at least two cases registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, as condition to accept his apology in a contempt of court case registered against him.
Advocate Shivanshu Gunwal was charged with raising his voice and questioning the court’s judicial wisdom, while making arguments in a trial court at Saket on behalf of a person accused of committing an offence under the POCSO Act.
After contempt proceedings were initiated against him, the lawyer apologised to the High Court for his conduct.
While accepting his apology, the Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta directed the lawyer to provide free legal services in at least two POCSO cases in the court of an Additional Sessions Judge (SC POCSO) at Saket courts, as may be decided by Presiding Officer (PO) Ankita Lal.
On November 23, 2024, during a trial at the Saket court, Advocate Gunwal allegedly raised his voice, pointed at the judge and questioned the court’s judicial wisdom.
Despite repeated warnings, the lawyer continued to argue, leading to disruption in proceedings and delay in the trial.
The trial court recorded in its order that Advocate Gunwal used phrases such as, “You tell me the law” and “Why don’t you convict the accused now itself.”
Even after withdrawing his vakalatnama (authorisation to represent the accused), the lawyer remained in the courtroom with associates, creating an intimidating atmosphere, and later threatened to file a complaint against the judge.
Taking cognisance of his behaviour, the High Court initiated a contempt case against him.
During the hearing of the contempt case in the High Court, Advocate Gunwal appeared in person and tendered an unconditional apology to the High Court and the trial court judge.
He contended that this was an isolated incident in his career spanning two decades. He added that he had never before been involved in such behaviour.
Taking in consideration his long-standing practice and apology, the High Court observed that there was no doubt about unnecessary aggression and raising of voice in court by the lawyer, which demonstrated disrespect and could not be tolerated.
Lawyers must uphold the dignity of the judicial process and maintain the courtroom decorum, it added.
The High Court closed the contempt case after accepting apology of Advocate Gunwal, provided he gave free legal services in at least two cases before the POCSO trial court, as would be assigned by the trial court’s presiding judge.