Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Friday discharged the show cause notices issued in contempt proceedings against 12 lawyers accused of involvement in an incident of vandalism at Tis Hazari Courts during a protest by advocates in 2006.

A three-judge bench comprising Justice Siddharth Mridul, Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta said that there was “no material” to provide any direct evidence connecting the damage allegedly caused to courtrooms with the protest.

“It is relevant to highlight that the present contempt proceedings are pending adjudication since 2006; and the Sword of Damocles‟ has been hanging for the past 17 years, on the alleged Contemnor/Respondents. Additionally, during the course of the present proceedings all the alleged Contemnors/Respondents have also expressed their deep remorse and have stated that they have utmost respect for the institution of judiciary and that it was never their intention to cause any distress or to do anything that could be construed as undermining the majesty and dignity of the Court of Law”, it said.

The three-judge bench said, “We discharge the Show Cause Notices issued to the remaining alleged Contemnors/Respondents in the present criminal contempt proceedings. Resultantly, the notice to show cause as to why criminal contempt be not drawn against the alleged Contemnors/Respondents, are hereby discharged”.

The criminal contempt proceedings emanated from the incident that occurred on February 24, 2006, at the Tis Hazari Courts where advocates went on a strike to oppose the establishment of the Rohini Court complex. The notices about contempt proceedings were initially issued to 25 people. Subsequently, 13 were either discharged or removed from the criminal contempt proceedings.

The bench observed that legal practitioners are the vanguard safeguarding the sanctity of the Constitution of India and more than anyone else; necessitate protection in the capacity of whistleblowers within the Court. “However, if there is a concerted assault by Members of the Bar, who claim affiliation with an organization that enjoys substantial support, then the Court cannot turn a blind-eye to the slanderous and scandalous allegations put forth”, the bench said in its 47-page judgment.

The court said that while permissible criticism of a judgment is acceptable, there exists a boundary beyond when it transforms into abusive, irrational, and personally targeted attacks on Judges; thereby compromising the overall integrity of the institution.

“Judges form an integral part of the mechanism for dispensing justice and Judges exhibit reluctance to invoke contempt laws in instances of personal attacks directed at them. However, if there is a concerted assault by Members of the Bar, who claim affiliation with an organization that enjoys substantial support, then the Court cannot turn a blind-eye to the slanderous and scandalous allegations put forth”, the court said.

The bench also emphasized that since the present proceedings were initiated against advocates, there was an additional requirement for “stringent proof” that the high court must fulfil.

The court noted that the videos did not furnish any evidence of advocates manhandling their colleagues, obstructing the administration of justice, or supporting any other allegation made against them.

"Hence, there exists no substantial evidence to establish obstruction of justice, acts of manhandling, or destruction of property. Therefore, it cannot be conclusively established that the act of protesting interfered with the administration of justice," the court concluded.

Case Title: Re: To Consider Suo Motu contempt of court v. Proceedings against the Tis Hazari court lawyers