【 RNI-HIN/2013/51580 】
【 RNI-MPHIN/2009/31101 】
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
'Even a bird cannot kill him' HM Narottam on Rahul Gandhi's security controversy in MP
Jabalpur police hoists flag at various locations in it’s offices, celebrates ‘Azadi ka Amrit Mahotsav’
थाना गांधीनगर के एसआई की गई कोरोना से जान: खाकीधारी रखे अपना ध्यान!
Cyber thugs dupe eldery with link sent on mobile, Rs 19,000 withdrawn in one go; Bhopal police registers case
Full Dress Final Rehearsal - गणतंत्र दिवस परेड की हुई मुकम्मल तैयारी, PHQ
Mirchi Baba Rape Case: Advocate argues Giri not present in Bhopal at the time of incident of rape stated by woman
Olympic Bronze Medalist Wrestler Sakshi Malik Appeals for Support in Fight for Justice and Truth
रूस की हुकुमत ने मुक़ामी मीडिया के डिजिटल सोर्स FB, Twitter के इस्तेमाल पर क्यों कसी नकेल?
MP: Hindu Mahasabha to host Godse Yatra from Gwalior to Delhi on 14 March
2 Students who flashed private parts on college teachers during zoom exam nabbed by State Cyber MP
कांग्रेस नेता सुरेश पचौरी की Name-Plate में लिखा नाम उर्दू में हुआ अब दुरूस्त!!!
Another disgusting comment by MP HC, reduces the sentence of a 4-yr old girl’s rapists saying ‘accused kind enough to leave the girl alive’
मध्य-भोपाल से मम्मा या मसूद?
दर्ज़नो तबादलों से थानों की कैफ़ियत में क्या आएगा बदलाओ??
मप्र: नाबालिग किशोर ने किया 6 साल की मासूम के साथ दुराचार
Total Visitors :- 384651