Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Shiva Kirti Singh heard an appeal filed by Senior Advocate & Gujarat Bar Association President Yatin Narendra Oza.
This appeal was filed against contempt proceedings initiated by the High Court of Gujarat as he wrote two ferocious letters to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India on the issue of transfer of two sitting judges of Gujarat High Court: Justice MR Shah and Justice KS Jhaveri.
Representing Senior Advocate Oza, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi said that considering the fact that the petitioner is the President of Bar Association, they only wanted to know whom they should contact for this matter. He made it clear that they are not asking for a vote on this issue.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi also said that his client has been the President of Bar Association 16 times; even if some constitutional wrong has been committed, it should be corrected by the appropriate authority. He said that Your Lordship may not gag the Bar, as the matter is concerning the community.
Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal also appeared, representing the petitioners and he submitted that if the Chief Justice of India had replied to the letters written by Senior Advocate Oza, then he wouldn’t have called the Bar Association meeting.
After this submission, this is how the arguments proceeded:
Justice Dipak Misra: “People keep writing letters to judges, we cannot send reply to all the letters. When a collective decision is taken by collegium which involves constitutional importance, it has to be respected. “
Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents then read out the letter which was written by Senior Advocate Oza and then circulated all over Gujarat High Court premises.
Justice Dipak Misra: “Is this the letter to which Mr. Sibal expects us to response? Does it give the authority to defame the entire bar on such scathing statements? “
Abhishek Manu Singhvi: “If there is a contempt, then this contempt is for Supreme Court, not the High Court.”
Justice Dipak Misra: “Please tell us, do you support this language? You don’t have the right to kill an institution. That shows the devious attitude.”
The matter has been adjourned till August 31st, 2016, when the Court will decide whether Bar Council of India can be made a party in this matter or not. Meanwhile, interim order shall continue till next hearing.