NEW DELHI: Vilification of judges can affect the administration of justice as it becomes a form of public mischief, Delhi High Court has said, slapping a showcause notice of contempt against a criminal lawyer.
The court acted after it found that the advocate levelled allegations against a judge of district court and the high court without basis and in disregard of the interests of his client, a rape survivor.
Justice Jasmeet Singh issued the showcause notice to the advocate as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him and granted him 14 days to respond. “There is a direct attack on the reputation and functioning of not only one judge, but several judges of this court. This vilification of judges can affect the administration of justice as it becomes a form of public mischief. An unwarranted attack on a judge cannot be ignored by this court,” Justice Singh noted when allegations surfaced in the appeal filed by the survivor challenging a trial court order.
“For a healthy democracy, there must be an impartial judiciary, however, it cannot be impaired by vindictive criticism. The judiciary is not immune from criticism, but when the criticism is based on distorted facts or gross misrepresentation of material averments, to intentionally lower the dignity and respect of this court, it must be taken cognisance of,” the court observed.
“To make allegations that a judge deliberately wanted to twist issues in order to favour an accused or that they were personally interested in the matter acted illegally or impartially are unjust statements,” it underlined.
During the hearing, the prosecution and the lawyer for the accused drew the attention of the court to the contents of the petition and objected to the same. The court examined the contents and gave a chance to the lawyer to retract those paragraphs containing personal, tainted and mala fide allegations against the judges.
However, the advocate refused, prompting the court to initiate contempt proceedings. The allegations are “scandalous and aimed at lowering the dignity and majesty of this court”, it observed.
