In contempt of Court, Guwahati HC sent lawyer to jail for 6 months

GUWAHATI: The Guwahati High Court has sentenced a lawyer to six months in jail after he was found guilty of contempt of court by, among other things, commenting on her dress and comparing it to a court officer. The fictitious devil was made to do.

A division bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana and Justice Devashis Baruah in a recent order also barred advocate Utpal Goswami from appearing as an advocate in any court under the jurisdiction of the High Court for 15 days.
Notably, the lawyer has been charged with criminal contempt under Section 14 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.
“The defendant has not only baselessly attacked the integrity and impartiality of the concerned judicial officer, but has also tarnished the character of the said judicial officer.” “Furthermore, the petitioner had assailed this Court by making derogatory remarks on the process of selection of judicial officers by questioning the sanctity of the electoral process,” the bench observed.
“The respondent has questioned the sanctity of the selection of judicial officers in the District Judiciary of the State by the Selection Committee of the Guwahati High Court, particularly on the grounds of “money power”, “misconduct”, “”Judges of the District Judiciary in Assam. and taking undue advantage during the selection and appointment of Magistrates”, “illegal relationships”, “illegal love and affection” and “other wrongful practices”has interfered in the administration of justice by impeaching officials attached to the appointment section of this court,” the court observed.
“Thus, the Judiciary in general has been directly attacked by the respondents. Therefore, it is apparent that the respondent has made a serious attack on the Judiciary in general and the judicial officer concerned in particular, which is another Everyone’s role is equivalent to corruption.
Goswami had filed an application under Section 24 CPC for conversion, which was pending in the court of Additional District Judge, Jorhat. In the petition, personal allegations were made against the concerned judicial officer and above all insulting remarks were made against the judiciary in general and against the concerned officer in particular.
The advocate mentioned in the petition that “Additional District Judge is presiding over the court wearing jewelery like a model on the ramp and at every opportunity she refers to unnecessary case laws and sections of statues to the lawyers without any hearing.” Tried to overwhelm/depress. Lawyers, and try to control the courtroom…”
The bench was also of the view that such remarks by a 52-year-old senior citizen would encourage other members of the bar across the country to use insulting and threatening language against judges whenever their interests were affected. Any adverse order should be passed against.
Notably, the District Judge, Jorhat directed the respondent/said to make necessary corrections in the application, which was apparently rejected by the respondent. Instead, the respondent, in order to beat the District Judge, Jorhat, issued an advocate notice under Section 80 of the CPC seeking permission to prosecute sheristadar along with the District and Sessions Judge, Jorhat.
This notice was sent to (i) the then Deputy Commissioner, Jorhat, (ii) the then Registrar General of this Court, and (iii) the then Registrar Vigilance of this Court. Inter alia, in the said counsel’s notice issued under Section 80 CPC, the respondent questioned the authority to refer to the statutory provision of Sheristadar stating that any administrative officer/assistant having any Has no legal degree and power He cannot cite a legal point/argument. on law/rules,” the order read.
Further, the defendant had alleged in the notice of the said advocate that the actions of the then famous District Judge and Sheristadar were not only illegal and unethical but also caused socio-economic loss along with mental agony to the defendant’s clients. Also arrived. -note and it justified the need to prosecute the then learned District Judge and Sherstar,” it read.
“Therefore, on the ground that the defendant had transgressed the bounds of fairness and truth or reasonable criticism, the then eminent District Judge, Jorhat, referred to this Court under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Court Act. 1971 to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the respondent. Consequently, this contempt petition was filed and proceedings were initiated by issuing a show cause notice to the respondents,” it read.
On receipt of the notice of commencement of contempt proceedings, the respondent filed his affidavit dated 17 January 2023 and in paragraph 5 thereof admitted the allegations.
“The plea of ​​the accused has been taken out here before. This matter was registered on 20th January, 2023 and this Court after taking notice of the fact that after the appearance of the accused in person, to assist him A senior counsel along with another counsel was appointed as amicus curiae in the matter. The order stated.
“Subsequently, during the hearing on March 9, 2023, in consideration of the defendant’s plea of ​​guilty, the findings of which were stated by the court, the defendant was afforded a further opportunity. However, during the hearing, the defendant confirmed his guilty plea.

Accordingly, order dated March 9, 2023, the respondent was convicted under Section 14 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971.