A contempt case was filed against the lawyer for making derogatory remarks about judges in the chat box during a virtual court hearing on WebEx.

In a Criminal Contempt Matter involving a lawyer, the Delhi High Court bench, consisting of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Amit Sharma, issued an order for simple imprisonment of 4 months and a fine of Rs. 2000.

In this Contempt Case, Sanjeev Kumar, the Contemnor, alleged that his wife had disclosed a past incident of sexual assault involving a cousin, which led him to file complaints seeking a police investigation. However, after an inquiry, the police found that his wife denied the incident, and the Metropolitan Magistrate dismissed the complaint, a decision later upheld by the Sessions Judge. The contemnor challenged these orders in the Delhi High Court, where the Single Judge ruled that he had no standing to file a complaint on behalf of his wife, as she herself had not pursued any legal action. Following further review attempts, the contemnor posted derogatory remarks about judges in a chat box on the WebEx video conferencing platform during a virtual court hearing. 

The comments included:

• "Hope this court will pass the order on merit without pressure of bar members." 

• "Jo darta hai wo kabhi justice nhi kar payega" (One who is afraid can never deliver justice.). 

• "Janboojhkar slow slow hearings karti hai" (Deliberately causes slow hearings) 

• "Galat order pass karti hai" (Passes incorrect orders) 

• “Pandit ki tarah bhavishya vani karti hai...Without merit order pass karti hai" (like a priest makes predictions... they pass orders without merit) 

• "Case jada hai toh Hon’ble Chief Justice of Delhi HC se aur case allocated mat karwao ish court ko...pahle old backlog finish kar lo" (If there are too many cases, don't allocate any more to this Court from the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court... first finish the old backlog)

• "Mere cases na sunne ke liye bar members ka pressure" (Bar members are applying pressure to prevent my cases from being heard)

These remarks led the judge to issue a show-cause notice. The Contemnor, in his response, included further defamatory statements about judicial officers, resulting in the court registering the matter as criminal contempt. Despite this, the contemnor continued to argue that the police had not investigated the alleged assault, claiming his wife’s statement remains unrecorded and no FIR had been filed.

The Amicus Curiae, Advocate Varun Goswami, appointed by the Court, pointed out that the Contemnor has repeatedly filed complaints, petitions, and revisions against his wife and her family. The Contemnor has also lodged complaints against judicial officers involved in his cases and made baseless allegations against sitting Judges of the Delhi High Court.

The Court found that the Contemnor, an Advocate, had made derogatory and scandalous allegations against judicial officers, judges, and police officers to settle personal scores with his wife and her family. His actions, including filing multiple frivolous complaints, were deemed contemptuous and an attempt to malign the court. Despite being given opportunities to apologize, the Contemnor showed no remorse. His conduct, especially using hybrid hearings to make derogatory remarks, led the court to conclude that he should be punished for criminal contempt. 

“The Contemnor has also not shown any remorse during the course of the submissions being heard by this Court. He has not expressed any apology and his entire conduct is merely an attempt to scandalize and malign the Courts. Such a conduct on behalf of the Contemnor, especially, someone who is qualified as an Advocate cannot be left unpunished.”

The court noted that his repeated baseless complaints and derogatory comments were an attempt to undermine the dignity and authority of the court.

"In addition, in the written submissions which the Contemnor has filed in response to the show cause which was issued by this Court, the manner in which the Contemnor refers to the ld. Single Judge of this Court and the various allegations which are made are completely unacceptable and are gross"

Accordingly, the court found the Contemnor guilty of criminal contempt due to his ongoing derogatory actions, including making baseless allegations and filing frivolous complaints. Despite being given the opportunity to express remorse, the Contemnor failed to do so, resulting in a sentence of 4 months' simple imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 2,000, and additional imprisonment for non-payment. His request for a suspension of the sentence was denied, and he was offered legal assistance from the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. The order was issued, and necessary actions were directed to be taken by the authorities.

Advocate for the Petitioner: Adv. Varun Goswami, Amicus Curiae

Advocate for the Respondent: Sanjeev Kumar—Contemnor/Respondent in Person.

Case Details: Court On Its Own Motion v. Sanjeev Kumar, Cont.Cas.(Crl.) 5/2024

(For more updates, tap to join us on Whatsapp, Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn)