By 
The Bombay High Court has come down hard on a senior government law officer for how he behaved in front of the judges. The court has issued a contempt notice to Dilip S. Ghumare, who is Secretary and Senior Legal Advisor in Maharashtra’s Department of Law and Judiciary. This happened after he reportedly lost his temper and shouted at the judges during a hearing.
The division bench of Justice Ajay Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata, said that Ghumare spoke in a loud tone that was “bordering to shouting” and tried to blame the High Court’s own administration for the issue. The judges said his behavior showed disrespect to the court and weakened its authority.
What the case was about
This all happened during a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) case about judicial appointments in Maharashtra. Ghumare, who is himself a Judicial Officer and previously held the top post of Principal Secretary in the same department, was present in court that day. The case was about the creation of 179 new Fast Track Courts and whether the government had taken proper steps to fill positions in those courts.
What went wrong in court
The judges had questions about statements made in an affidavit that Ghumare had filed, related to these 179 Fast Track Courts. When they asked him to explain it, he seemed unsure how to respond. Justice Khata then asked him a simple, direct question: who wrote the affidavit, and did it contain everything it needed to on this issue?
Instead of answering, Ghumare reportedly got angry and started blaming the High Court’s administration.
The judges described what happened in their order:
“Observing his hesitation, Justice Khata put to him a straightforward question: who had drafted the Affidavit, and whether it contained the necessary averments in question. Rather than responding to our query, the Deponent launched into an aggressive, high-pitched tone (bordering to shouting) inter alia blaming the High Court administration, apart from other sentences stated that ‘the High Court Administration was responsible for not filling up the 179 posts’ before a packed Courtroom.”
The judges made clear they saw this as a serious issue, not just a small mistake.
“We are of the view that, Ghumare’s unwarranted outburst and aggressive demeanour, deliberately displayed in open Court in full public view while attempting to justify the stand in his Affidavits, not only scandalised the Court but undermined and attempted to lower its authority, constituting contempt ex facie, as contemplated under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”
The bench added that this was not just an ordinary disagreement or a one-time mistake during an argument. They saw it as a deliberate attack on the court’s dignity, and said it was even more serious because it happened in a courtroom full of people.
The apology that was rejected
Later in the hearing, the judges called Advocate General Dr. Milind Sathe into the courtroom. On Ghumare’s behalf, an apology was offered through the Advocate General. But the judges refused to accept it, saying that because Ghumare holds a senior position and is himself a Judicial Officer, his conduct was even more serious, not less.
The court explained its reasoning:
“Such conduct is manifestly unbecoming of any judicial officer and simply outrageous, falling far below the standard we would expect. It has long been the settled practice of this Court that all litigants, whether in civil or criminal matters, are expected to maintain decorum and respect the sanctity of these proceedings. This expectation is not merely heightened, but becomes imperative, when the person in question is himself a judicial officer. A Judicial Officer cannot exhibit such a behaviour in open court and thereafter expect a pardon through an apology in any manner or form later. To permit this would convey to the public at large a deeply troubling message: that one can commit an otherwise inexcusable act with impunity in open Court and then sheepishly, in a theatrical manner, not meaning a word of it, offer an apology, either through a Senior Counsel or Advocate General to absolve himself of an act which ex facie is contemptuous.”
Court’s message on respecting the judiciary
The judges said that no one has the right to disrespect the court, no matter how senior their government position is. They pointed out that Ghumare’s past and present roles meant he understood very well how important court proceedings are, and how important it is to maintain a proper relationship between the government (executive) and the judiciary.
In their words:
“Ghumare was formerly a Principal Secretary and currently is a Secretary at the Department of Law and Judiciary cannot certainly forget that he is a Judicial Officer and cannot start regarding the Court as utterly insignificant, irrelevant or inconsequential in any manner nor can it be lightly trammeled upon. The post of a Principal Secretary or Secretary at the Department of Law and Judiciary is an important position in the interface between the Judiciary and the Legislature. Regardless of the substance of the dispute, it does not confer on him the privilege to treat this Court with utter disrespect. We therefore issue notice to Ghumare, Secretary and Senior Legal Advisor, Department of Law and Judiciary, Mantralaya, Mumbai, as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him for committing the aforesaid act.”
What happens next
The Bombay High Court has formally issued a contempt notice to Ghumare. He will now have to explain why contempt proceedings shouldn’t be started against him because of his behavior in court. The case will be heard again on September 11.
Case Details: Vihar Shivajirao Durve vs State of Maharashtra (Interim Application 2678 of 2025)
