Supreme Court refuses to interfere with punishment awarded to lawyer who abused female Judge
The Supreme Court has refused to interfere with an order convicting a lawyer namely Sanjay Rathore who used abusive language towards a female judge.
"We are not inclined to interfere with the orders impugned passed by the High Court. The present petition is, accordingly, dismissed", ordered a bench of Justices PK Mishra and Manmohan.
In May, Delhi High Court had upheld the conviction of Rathore for using abusive language towards a female judge in a challan matter, calling the case where 'injustice was done to justice itself.'
While rejecting the plea for leniency, a bench led by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the female presiding officer was only discharging her solemn duty of dispensing justice but was subjected to misconduct, threats, and humiliation by someone who, as an advocate, was duty-bound to uphold the dignity of the court.
"The act of outraging the modesty of a judicial officer while she was presiding over Court proceedings, seated on the dais and discharging her solemn duty of dispensing justice, in this Court‟s opinion, attacks the very foundation of judicial decorum and the institutional integrity," the high court held.
Advocate Sanjay Rathore had entered the courtroom presided over by a Metropolitan Magistrate and began shouting upon learning that his challan matter had been adjourned.
He allegedly used abusive and disrespectful language towards the presiding female judge and said “aise kar dia adjourn matter, aise kese date de di, main keh rha hun, abhi lo matter, order karo abhi.” When the female judge asked him about his vakalatnama, the petitioner arrogantly responded, “dekh lo lga hai challan ke sath mein, usi mein mera naam hai.”
Based on the advocate’s behaviour, the female judge suspected that he was under the influence of alcohol. He then allegedly uttered an extremely offensive and vulgar remark towards the judge, stating: "chadhi far kar rakh dunga.”
Following this, the Metropolitan Magistrate filed an FIR, and the Trial Court convicted the advocate under various sections of the IPC.
Highlighting the vulnerabilities faced by women in power and the gendered nature of abuse, the High Court had said that even the seat of justice cannot guarantee immunity from gendered abuse. It added that when a female judge becomes the target of personal indignity and humiliation by an officer of the court, it reflects not only a personal wrong but also the systemic vulnerability women continue to face, even at the highest echelons of legal authority.
"If those placed in the system to uphold justice are made to feel unsafe, disrespected, or helpless, the message that would resonate across the legal and social ecosystem would be deeply regressive. When a female judge is targeted in a manner that outrages her modesty or challenges her authority, it not only impacts her personally but also repositions her, symbolically and practically, back into the category of the vulnerable. This is not just an act against an individual; it is an act against institutional integrity," the high court ruled.
Case Title: SANJAY RATHORE vs. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT DELHI) & ANR.