Supreme Court in a Suo Moto petition upholds the Conviction of an Advocate for Contempt of Court
Case title
Case Name: P. R. Adikesavan vs The Registrar General High Court, Criminal Appeal No 847 of 2022
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of a lawyer against the high court order which punished him for contempt of court and awarded him two weeks of simple imprisonment.
The background of this matter goes back to an insolvency proceeding that was initiated against the appellant under the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act 1909. A non-bailable warrant was issued against the appellant by a single judge bench of Madras High Court, but he failed to appear. A few days later when a team of police tried to execute the warrant, the appellant and fifty other advocates prevented them from taking the appellant and executing the order. This incident was brought to the notice of the court through a video clipping. The court noted the appellant was aware of the pending proceedings and the issuance of a non-bailable warrant against him, regardless of this he choose to disrespect the law. Therefore, the acts of the appellant and fellow advocates lead to clear obstruction of the administration of Justice.
In the words of the single judge bench: “The act becomes all the more contumacious as the respondent and the others who are members of the noble profession have committed this act. They are bound to respect not only the dignity of this Court but also the orders of this Court.”
Following this, proceedings under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1926 were initiated against the appellant.
Even after this, the appellant kept asking for adjournment of proceedings and when the bench finally listed the case, the appellant filed two sub-applications. one seeking to issue summons to Justice PT Asha for examining her as a witness in this case and another, for recusal of Justice PN Prakash from hearing the case. The HC granted him time to make out any valid grievance for the recusal of the judge but the appellant took back the applications from the Registry and did not re-present them. Therefore, the HC sentenced the appellant to undergo two weeks of simple imprisonment and was directed to pay a fine of Rs 2000. Moreover, he was also barred from practising as an Advocate in the Madras High Court for a year. It was observed by the court that the police did not use any force against the appellant and was abused by him and his fellow advocates.
In the present appeal, the appellant requests the court to accept his apology and grant some leniency.
A vacation bench comprising Justices DY Chandracud and Bela M Trivedi noted that:
“The behaviour and conduct of the appellant, who is a member of the Bar have been thoroughly contemptuous. There was a clear attempt to obstruct the process of justice when the non-bailable warrant was sought to be served on him by the competent police officials, which has been recorded in the video footage…The appellant has no respect for the administration of justice. The finding of contempt, as well as the sentence, cannot be regarded as disproportionate. Similarly, the debarment from practising for a period of one year is in accordance with the judgment of this Court in R.K. Anand vs Registrar, Delhi High Court ((2009) 8 SCC 106).”
About The Author
