【 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
Election commission's Press conference at 4:30 pm, dates of assembly elections to be announced for 5 States
लॉकडाउन में सड़को के छोटे व्यापारियों के रोज़गार पर विचार करे सरकार!!
Bhopal: BJP releases names of 13 candidates for municipal corporation elections
रात के ढाबो पर नशे का पनपता बाज़ार,पेट्रोल डाल के धड़काने की बीती वारदात:!!
Bajrang Dal members stage protest against namaz inside DB mall of Bhopal by singing bhajans
IT raids 40 locations of Bansal Group in Bhopal, Indore & Mandideep; brings ring ceremony vehicles
Bhopal: Woman attacked with blade for protesting against whistling & lewd remarks, 118 stitches from face to neck
Punjab court issues notice to Mallikarjun Kharge in ₹100 crore defamation suit after Congress manifesto equates Bajrang Dal with PFI, SIMI
Transfer of more than 50 Tehsildars in MP, see complete list here
किसानों के नाम पर राजनैतिक रोटियां सैंक रहे शिवराज: पटवारी
गाय के गोश्त का ज़िक्र होटल रेस्तरां के साइनबोर्ड से कल तक हटाने के फ़रमान!!!
खाकीधारी बना खलनायक: पत्नी और साली को दिनदहाड़े उतारा मौत के घाट?
Hawk Forces recover explosives & electronic units from drum after an encounter with maoists in Balaghat’s jungle
योगी आज दाखिल करेंगे भाजपा प्रत्याशी की शक़्ल में नामांकन !
चिलचिलाती धुप में अब बुझेगी राहगीरों की प्यास!
About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Rss Feed
Total Visitors :- 384651