Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sentenced Advocate Virendra Singh to six months of simple imprisonment for criminal contempt of court after Singh made "contemptuous allegations against the sitting judges of the high court and the district judiciary".

A division bench comprising Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Shalinder Kaur noted that Singh was given the opportunity to offer an unconditional apology, but he steadfastly refused, standing by the allegations he had made.

The court, in its observation, highlighted that this refusal demonstrated a lack of repentance for his conduct.

"Having considered the material placed on record, submissions of contemnor, this Court is of the opinion that contemnor has no repentance for his conduct and actions. Consequently, we hereby sentence him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months with a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo simple imprisonment of 7 days. The contemnor is directed to be taken into custody by SI Prem (Naib Court), who, along with SHO, Police Station Tilak Marg, shall hand over his custody to the Superintendent, Tihar Jail, Delhi,” the court ordered.

The court allowed Singh a brief visit to his home to change clothes, attend to his vehicle parked in the high court parking, and collect his medicines for transportation to jail.

The genesis of the contempt case traces back to a criminal appeal filed by Singh, scheduled for a single-judge hearing on July 14, 2022. In the plea, Singh levied various allegations against several judges, accusing them of arbitrary, whimsical, or biased actions. The judges were explicitly named in the petition.

Upon inquiry by the single judge, Singh refused to retract the allegations, contending that they were statements of fact rather than contemptuous accusations. The single-judge issued a contempt notice against Singh, transferring the matter to the division bench overseeing the contempt roster.

The division bench, after extensive hearings, rejected Singh's argument that the allegations were intended to provide background information. The court deemed Singh's allegations "contumacious" and "scandalous," emphasizing the seriousness of an officer of the court making such imputations in judicial pleadings.

"We had given an opportunity to the contemnor/respondent to seek an apology in respect of contemptuous allegations made by him in the criminal appeal, but the contemnor replied in negative and stated that he stands by whatever allegations he has made, either against the learned Judges of this Court or against the Judges of the District Court and the judiciary as such", the court said. 

Conclusively, court sentenced Singh to six months of imprisonment for his actions.

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. Virendra Singh Advocate