The Allahabad High Court contempt ruling highlights the judiciary’s firm stance against derogatory remarks that undermine judicial authority. Justice Santosh Rai ordered initiation of contempt proceedings against Advocate Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, who told the Court that it appeared to be working under government pressure during a bail hearing.
📜 Case Background
- Case: Kunal v. State of UP
- Court: Allahabad High Court
- Judge: Justice Santosh Rai
- Issue: Remarks by counsel alleging judicial bias under government pressure
Mishra’s remarks disrupted proceedings for nearly ten minutes, prompting the Court to note that his tone and body language were scandalous and derogatory.
🧑⚖️ Court’s Observations
- Remarks amounted to scandalising the Court and interfering with justice.
- Conduct prima facie falls within criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
- Ordered reference for contempt proceedings to be placed before the Chief Justice for suitable action.
- Justice Rai recused himself from the bail matter following the incident.
💬 Vakilify Insight
This Allahabad High Court contempt ruling underscores the judiciary’s intolerance for conduct that undermines its dignity. While lawyers are expected to argue forcefully, crossing into scandalous allegations against judges can attract contempt proceedings. The ruling reinforces the balance between robust advocacy and respect for judicial authority.
🔗 Related Reading and Links
- 👉 Outbound link: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016
- 👉 Vakilify Blog: Maintenance Denied to Wife – CrPC Section 125
