Anxiety during trial doesn't justify act of casting aspersion on judge or integrity of court: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday closed a contempt case against a person while imposing cost of Rs. 5000.

Court stated that the man's anxiety during the trial of the case filed by his ex-wife did not give him the right to cast aspersions on a judge or the integrity of the court.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora acknowledged the man namely Rehman Aftab Alam’s unconditional apology and cautioned him to exercise restraint in the future and refrain from casting any aspersions on the court.

“If he casts doubt on the court's integrity in any future legal proceedings in which he is a party, the record of the contempt petition will be used as evidence, and such conduct will be considered 'aggravated contempt of court' under section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971”, the court said.

The court dismissed the contempt petition filed on September 29, 2016, which was referred by Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala of Karkardooma Courts. The judge had remarked that during a trial in a 2011 case, the defendant routinely questioned the court's legitimacy after being denied relief in previous motions seeking similar relief.

Acting as an Amicus Curiae in the case, Senior Advocate Akshay Makhija, urged the court to take into account the defendant's lack of legal training and the fact that he was defending his case in person, which led to his inappropriate behavior and use of foul language in the application.

He also requested that the court takes into account that the defendant was a layperson with no legal education and that he used impolite language in the application because the transfer applications he filed were deemed to be without merit. He argued that the court should be lenient in its decision-making given the respondent's meager earnings with which he has to support his five children.

The court opined that: “The anxiety which the respondent went through during the trial does not justify his actions of casting aspersion on the presiding judge”.

"If the contemnor's explanation for his 'intemperate pleadings' is accepted, it would entitle every litigant to undermine the majesty of the court on the specious plea of anxiety", court added.

While imposing a cost of Rs. 5,000 on Alam, the court said that the same be deposited with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks. Additionally, the court stated that Alam from now onwards will be under an obligation to disclose the present order to the high court if any subsequent contempt proceedings are filed against him.

Accordingly, the petition was disposed of.

Cause Title: Court On Its Own Motion vs. Rehman Aftab Alam