Allahabad High Court Convicts Advocate For Contempt For Saying Judges “Behaved Like Goondas”
The Court also issued notice proposing to debar him from practicing before the High Court at Allahabad and Lucknow for three years.
The Allahabad High Court convicted an advocate for committing criminal contempt, after he appeared before the Court in improper attire, refused to wear his uniform, used abusive language, and stated that the Judges were “behaving like goondas.”
The court imposed a fine of Rs.2,000/- and a sentence of six months simple imprisonment.
The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Brij Raj Singh observed, “This unprofessionalism and forceful intrusion into judicial proceedings, especially by a practicing Advocate, is an egregious violation of courtroom protocol and discipline. It demonstrates not only disrespect towards the Bench but also an intention to disrupt and derail the course of justice.”
The Court added, “The primary object of the contempt jurisdiction is not to protect the dignity of individual Judges but to maintain public confidence in the judicial system. When such confidence is shaken, the administration of justice suffers.”
The Contemnor appeared in person, while the Government Advocate appeared for the Applicant.
Brief Facts
The Contemnor, an Advocate, had appeared before the Court in improper civil attire, wearing an unbuttoned shirt. When the Court advised him to appear in decent dress, he defied the Court’s direction and refused to wear the advocate's uniform, further questioning the Court on the definition of “decent dress.” He created disturbance, used abusive language, and claimed that the Judges were “behaving like goondas,” thereby scandalizing the Court and attempting to diminish its authority before the advocates and others present.
The Court also noted that earlier during the hearing of a matter, he had similarly barged into the Court without uniform, shouted at the top of his voice, and disrupted the proceedings, claiming his right to address the Court out of turn as a member of the Awadh Bar Association.
Noting his behaviour, the Court directed the Court Officer and security to remove the Contemnor from the courtroom and was ordered to be kept in custody until 3:00 PM to give him time to reflect upon his conduct and possibly tender an unconditional apology to the Court.
Upon release from custody at 3:00 PM, Contemnor once again entered the courtroom and, instead of expressing remorse or offering any apology, resumed his disruptive behaviour. Taking note of his contemptuous conduct, the Court initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against him.
Reasoning of the Court
The Court noted that the Contemnor had exhibited a pattern of contemptuous behaviour before the Court, disrespecting the Judiciary since 2002, and had shown no remorse when he was afforded a chance to. The Court stated, “Such repeated misconduct shows that the contemnor is not merely misguided but is intentionally engaged in a pattern of behaviour aimed at undermining the authority of this Court. He continues to disregard orders of the Court, refuses to acknowledge the error of his ways, and shows no signs of reform.”
The Court observed that despite service of show cause notice and multiple adjournments, the Contemnor failed to file any reply, affidavit, or explanation to the charges. “His persistent non-cooperation with the Court, coupled with his silence in response to the specific charges framed, leads us to infer that he has no defense to offer and remains recalcitrant and unrepentant”, the Court added.
The Bench observed that even after being debarred from entering the High Court premises for two years, the Contemnor has shown no inclination to reform or express any remorse. It noted, “On the contrary, his conduct demonstrates a continuing pattern of deliberate defiance and misconduct. The above conduct of contemnor clearly shows that he treats the judicial process with utter disdain and continues to undermine the dignity and integrity of the institution with impunity.”
The Court held that the conduct of the contemnor fell within the ambit of Section 2(c)(i) and 2(c)(ii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Consequently, the Court sentenced the Contemnor to six months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/-, with an additional one month’s imprisonment in default of payment. The Court also issued notice under the Allahabad High Court Rules, proposing to debar the Contemnor from practicing before the High Court at Allahabad and Lucknow for three years, and allowed him to file a reply by May 1, 2025.
Cause Title: State of U.P. v. Ashok Pande (CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CRIMINAL) No. - 1493 of 2021)
