On 14 December 2022, a lawyer named Shakti Chand Rana allegedly misbehaved in Court before a Delhi High Court Judge who passed an order stating that Rana's conduct prima facie amounted to criminal contempt under Section 14 of the Contempt of Court Act, and requesting the Chief Justice to take cognizance of such contempt.
Pursuant to this order, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court heard the suo moto contempt case against this lawyer on 19 December and issued notice to him to show cause as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him.
All this is fine, as the process of law has been set in motion, and and that process ought to proceed with all constitutional safeguards.
However, on 16 December, the Executive Committee of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) issued a resolution noting with "grave concern" that the lawyer "apparently misbehaved and created nuisance and disruption of court proceedings" and strongly condemned this behaviour and reiterated that "such conduct is unacceptable and against the dignity of this Bar."
The DHCBA resolution then went on to state that:
"It is further resolved that said lawyer should be dealt with a heavy hand and stern action be taken against him, which should be a reminder to all to never belittle the majesty of law or act in an indiscipline or disrespect manner."
Unpopular Opinion
The Executive Committee of the DHCBA ought not to have issued this resolution. It was unnecessary as the legal process to address the incident was already in motion and the law will and ought to take its own course.
The resolution improperly condemns the lawyer without a hearing, creates a factual narrative without a hearing, and exhorts the Bench to deal with the lawyer with a heavy hand and sternness, all of which violate the constitutional rights of the alleged contemnor, including the right to be treated as innocent until proven guilty, the right to natural justice, and the right to a free and fair trial.
The Executive Committee of the DHCBA would have done well to not issue such a resolution and to let the law take its own course.
The Executive Committee of the DHCBA is an elected body to represent lawyers. It is expected to observe the rule of law and to facilitate it. It is expected to establish a balanced relationship between the Bench and the Bar to promote the objective of Justice.
In this case the Executive Committee of the DHCBA could be viewed as pandering to the Court and as trampling upon the rights of the alleged contemnor in the process. It was all unnecessary and best avoided.
And finally in wanting to make an example of the lawyer so that his fate "should be a reminder to all to never belittle the majesty of law or act in an indiscipline or disrespect manner", the Executive Committee of the DHCBA erred in assuming that the severity of the punishment for criminal contempt should be influenced by it acting as a deterrent to others. That is not the case.
The lawyer must be allowed to defend himself.
See news reports at https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/delhi-hc-contempt-notice-to-lawyer-who-disrupted-proceedings-for-45-mins-101671518356626.html
No comments:
Post a Comment