Judges can’t be intimidated: SC
A bench of justices BS Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar said in a judgement that judges cannot be intimidated to obtain favourable orders as otherwise it would shake the very foundation of the judiciary.
New Delhi: Observing that humiliation and
false allegations against judges should be dealt with a heavy
hand, the Supreme Court has upheld the three-month prison
term for an advocate who abused a judge in filthy language.
A bench of justices BS Chauhan and Swatanter Kumar said
in a judgement that judges cannot be intimidated to obtain
favourable orders as otherwise it would shake the very
foundation of the judiciary.
"The dangerous trend of making false allegations against
judicial officers and humiliating them requires to be curbed
with heavy hands, otherwise the judicial system itself would
"The Bench and the Bar have to avoid unwarranted
situations on trivial issues that hamper the cause of justice
and are in the interest of none," Justice Chauhan, writing the
The apex court passed the ruling while dismissing the
appeal of advocate Vishram Singh Raghubanshi who on July 25,
1998, is alleged to have produced one Om Prakash for
surrender, impersonating him as Ram Kishan S/o Ashrafi Lal who
was wanted in a criminal case, in the court of IInd ACJM in
However, when the judge put certain questions to the
counsel on the bonafides of his claim, the advocate is said to
have climbed up to the podium and abused him in filthy
language in front of the entire gathering.
The Allahabad High Court, after initiating contempt
proceedings, sentenced him to three months simple imprisonment
with a fine of Rs.2,000, following which he appealed in the
"The courts certainly cannot be intimidated to seek
favourable orders. The appellant intimidated the presiding
officer of the court, hurling filthiest abuses and lowered the
authority of the court, which is tantamount to interfere with
the due course of judicial proceedings.
"The charge which stood proved against the appellant
could not be taken lightly and in such a fact-situation, the
apology tendered by him, being not bona fide, was not
"In order to protect the administration of public
justice, we must take action as his conduct and utterances
cannot be ignored or pardoned. The appellant had no business
to overawe the court," the apex court said.
The bench said that under no circumstances, such a person
can be permitted to become the law unto himself as it would
put the very existence of the system of administration of
justice at a stake.
"The contemnor abused the judge in most filthy words
unworthy of mouthing by an ordinary person and there was no
justification for him to ascend the dais during the course of
the proceedings and then abusing the judicial officer", the
"Thus, it is apparent that the contempt jurisdiction
is to uphold the majesty and dignity of the law courts and the
image of such majesty in the minds of the public cannot be
allowed to be distorted," the bench said.