Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court, recently, initiated suo moto contempt proceedings against a lawyer who made personal remarks on judges and posted such remarks in the video conferencing chatbox during the court proceedings. The lawyer remarked, ‘galat order pass karti hai, pandit ki tarah bhavishya vani karti hai...Without merit order pass karti hai’ (She passes wrong orders, makes predictions like a pandit. Passes orders without merit). 

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta held, “Reckless allegations made against several Judicial Officers of the District Courts as well as the comments placed by the petitioner in the public domain in the Chat Box have grave implications and potentiality of mischief, if the same are not curbed with a firm hand”.

The lawyer filed an application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC before the trial court to register an FIR concerning the alleged rape of his wife by her cousin when she was 16 years old. The trial court, however, declined to exercise its powers under Section 156(3) CrPC to order an investigation and register an FIR but allowed the lawyer to testify under Section 200 CrPC. 

Dissatisfied with this decision, the lawyer filed a Revision Petition before the appellate court, which was also dismissed. The lawyer then approached the high court to set aside the orders passed by both the appellate and trial courts. After this dismissal, the lawyer filed a Review Petition, which was pending consideration. During the pendency of this review, the petitioner made irrelevant comments in the Chat Box.

The court noted that the lawyer criticized Metropolitan Magistrate Rishabh Tanwar, for dismissing his application under Section 156(3) CrPC without commenting on the evidence, and subsequently filed a complaint against Tanwar, leading to his transfer.

The court further noted that the lawyer accused Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta of ignoring his submissions and failing to perform his duties, filing a complaint against Madhu Jain for misconduct, which led to her transfer.

Additionally, the court noted that the lawyer alleged that ASJ Lokesh Kumar Sharma threatened him and dismissed his revision petition under the influence of the President of the Saket Bar Association. He accused various judges and officials of undermining the judicial system and called for their punishment for criminal contempt of court.

The bench observed that the lawyer was using the proceedings to gain an advantage in the pending matrimonial disputes against his wife. The Court noted that the wife did not make any complaints or allegations regarding the alleged offence, suggesting that the complaint was filed maliciously on her behalf.

The court emphasized, “wheels of criminal justice system cannot bem permitted to be clogged by frivolous complaints wherein the victim herself does not have a grievance but the same is maliciously filed on her behalf and this may be an agonizing way of harassment not only to the spouse but a person who may be innocently framed and prosecuted”. 

Accordingly, the court transferred the matter to the bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmmet PS Arora. 

Case Title: Sanjeev Kumar v State Of NCT Of Delhi & Ors (CRL.M.C. 545/2024)