Contempt proceedings: Judicial officer can't shout at judges in court, says SC

A judicial officer cannot shout at the judges in a court, the Supreme Court on Thursday said, while refusing to stay contempt proceedings initiated by the Bombay High Court against a judicial officer for his "unwarranted outburst".

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said the high court may proceed with the contempt proceedings but will not take a final decision till September 28.

The top court agreed to hear a plea filed by the officer challenging the high court's September 1 order initiating contempt proceedings against him.

When the bench said it would issue notice on the plea, senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the petitioner, sought a stay on the contempt proceedings before the high court.

"A judicial officer can't shout at the judges in a court," the bench observed.

Singh said the petitioner had not shouted in the court and had also tendered an unconditional apology before the high court.

"A judicial officer has no business to tell the high court that it is the court which is responsible for not filling up the posts. He should repent for his words. This is gross indiscipline," the bench observed.

The top court advised the petitioner to go back to the high court and tender an unconditional apology there.

Singh said the petitioner had already tendered an apology before the high court and he has been transferred to a Naxalite area which is around 1,000 kilometres away.

He said the high court had noted in its order that the petitioner had used a high-pitched tone, "bordering on shouting".

"We are fixing it for September 28. We will say that the high court may proceed with the contempt proceedings but not take a final decision till the next date fixed," the bench said.

Contempt proceedings over alleged courtroom outburst

The controversy arose before the high court during the hearing on an interim application seeking direction to create 179 posts of fast track courts.

The high court had found the affidavit filed earlier by the officer, who was the secretary and senior legal advisor in the Department of Law and Judiciary of the state, to be unsatisfactory.

In its September 1 order, the high court noted that it asked the additional government pleader as to which averments in the additional affidavit stated that 179 new posts for fast-track courts were created.

It noted that since the officer was present in the high court, the bench asked him to point it out.

"Rather than responding to our query, the deponent (officer) launched into an aggressive, high-pitched tone (bordering to shouting), inter alia blaming the high court administration, apart from other sentences stated that 'the High Court administration was responsible for not filling up the 179 posts' before a packed courtroom," the high court noted.

High court calls conduct gross indiscipline

It said his "unwarranted outburst and aggressive" demeanour, deliberately displayed in the open court in full public view while attempting to justify the stand in his affidavits, not only scandalised the court but undermined and attempted to lower its authority.

Noting that he was a senior judicial officer, the high court said his intemperate outburst against this court's administration in full public view constituted a deliberate and unwarranted assault upon the dignity and authority of the court.

It had said a judicial officer cannot exhibit such a behaviour in open court and thereafter expect a pardon through an apology in any manner or form later.

Supreme Court allows proceedings to continue

The high court had issued notice to the officer as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him, and posted the matter for September 11.