【 RNI-HIN/2013/51580 】
【 RNI-MPHIN/2009/31101 】
Jansamparklife.com
While SC issues contempt notice to petitioner-advocate for derogatory remarks on HC, Hey Supreme Court can we say F*** You?
12 Nov 2022
A petitioner-advocate and his Advocate-on-Record (AoR) on Friday invited the ire of the Supreme Court, which issued a contempt notice against them for their derogatory remarks against the Karnataka High Court. (Mohan Chandra P v. State of Karnataka and ors)
A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna sought the response of petitioner Mohan Chandra P and AoR Vipin Kumar Jai after finding that derogatory and contemptuous observations were made against the Karnataka High Court in their plea.
It directed both of them to be present in Court on the next date of hearing, which is on December 2 this year.
"The Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of M.Y. Shareef and Another v. The Hon’ble Judges of the High Court of Nagpur and Ors. (1955) 1 S.C.R. 757, has held that even a lawyer who subscribes his signatures to such derogatory and contemptuous averments is guilty for committing contempt of the Court," the order stated.
Chandra's writ petition challenging the selection of the State's Chief Information Commissioner and the Information Commissioners was first dismissed by a single-judge of the High Court earlier this year.
In September, a Division Bench of the High Court found that no material was placed to support his averments, and imposed costs of ₹5 lakh on him for wasting the Court's time. This decision was challenged before the apex court.
Some of the averments made in the appeal that the top court took objection to included:
"...the reason assigned by the Division Bench of High Court of Karnataka for extraneous reason and to harass the respondents is unwarranted one and without any basis or foundation."
"...as a revenge imposed exemplary cost of Rs.5 lakh to the petitioner."
"Only to show favouritism towards the respondents and to harass the Petitioner and only to gain publicity, the Division Bench of High Court of Karnataka has imposed exemplary cost for ulterior purpose."
The Bench stated in its order,
"The aforesaid observations are not only derogatory to the Karnataka High Court but highly contemptuous in nature."
Advocates Bipin Kalappa, Kumari Rashmi Rani, Rashi Jaiswal, Pratiush Pratik, Sakal Dev Sharma, Vineet Kumar, J Prasanth, N Ravi, Sanjay Prakash Goyatan, Krupal Krishnarao Paluskar, MN Krishma, and Dhanesh Leshdhan also represented the petitioner.
हिंदुस्तान ताज़ा सुर्खियाँ खबरे छूट गयी होत
Latest Updates
मप्र स्वास्थ विभाग: वेबसाइट पर उपलब्ध बेड की जानकारी का दावा केवल सफेद झूठ
Hard hitting realities in Neemuch Bhil youth death row, prior police only registered an accident case
CM शिवराज के बाद भोपाल पुलिस की करतूत पर बरसे कमलनाथ, पीसी शर्मा; किसकी शह पर भोपाल पुलिस ने कि ऐसी बेरहमी
Let's settle scores: you still can't tolerate women smoking? Well, this is for you
After CM expresses displeasure, bar of Rajdoot Hotel in Bhopal shut down by administration in Bhopal
अतिथि विद्वानों को खाली जगह पर करेंगे एडजेस्ट: पीसी शर्मा
India sends 19 satellites to space along with PM's photo and e-Bhagavad Gita
सादगीदार खूबसूरती के मालिक IPS सचिन अतुलकर को सालगिराह मुबारक़!
राजधानी में फिर लूटी नाबालिग़ की आबरू बंद कमरे में बलात्कार की वारदात!!
अपराध उगलता भोपाल: शहरभर में लगातार हाहाकार, बलात्कार, अत्याचार क्यों?
Inquiry committee formed to inspect new forest building worth Rs 174 crore of the MP Forest Department
Iran nationals arrested from Vidisha & Bhopal sent to Judicial Custody, Police sends communication to MFA
मन्दिर की दानपेटी से नगदी चुराने वाले चोर मय मशरुका के पुलिस गिरफ्त में!!
अज्ञात हत्यारे ने अंधेरे में किया अंधा क़त्ल !
दोषी कितना भी बड़ा हो बख्शा नहीं जाएगा: बाला बच्चन
About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Rss Feed
Total Visitors :- 384651