The appellant who is practicing as an advocate had attacked
the integrity of the Sub -Judge by saying that he was a contractor of
the Municipal Committee, that he was in collusion with the Dy.
Commissioner and he was under his influence while representing the
plaintiff in civil suit and an interim stay was not given. The
subordinate Judge reported the matter to the District and Session Judge
and the latter submitted a report to the high Court.
The
High court inquired and in its proceedings, it viewed that the
appellant had brought himself clearly within the Ambit of Contempt of
Court and he was accordingly found guilty under section 2(c) (i) of the
Act. The Appellant tendered an unqualified apology to the Court and
begged for all forgiveness. As this is not the first occasion in which
proceedings for contempt of Court had been initiated against the
Appellant and in that case also he tendered unqualified apology before
the High Court. The High Court did not accept the apology tendered by
the Appellant and sentenced him for two months imprisonment.
The
Supreme Court on appeal held that punishing an advocate for Contempt of
Court, no doubt, must be regarded as an extreme measure, but to
preserve the dignity of Judiciary, it becomes the duty of the Court to
punish the contemner. It was held that the sentence of two months
imprisonment is in no way calls for interference. The Court, hence,
confirmed the punishment and dismissed his criminal appeal.
0 comments:
Post a Comment