Court cautions lawyer to uphold dignity in judicial submissions after derogatory remarks
In a significant development at the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Justice Ramkumar Choubey presiding over the bench in Jabalpur, chose not to initiate contempt proceedings against Advocate Shri Sudeep Singh Saini following his unconditional apology. The incident arose during a hearing on May 6, 2026, involving a bail application under the Essential Commodities Act, where the advocate made comments perceived as derogatory to the court's dignity.
Shri Saini, representing applicant Jagdish Varkade, had implied that the court's decision to deny bail was influenced by the seniority of representation, suggesting that similar relief had been granted to other accused represented by senior advocates. Justice Choubey initially directed the counsel to substantiate his claims by presenting records of orders in similar cases.
On May 8, 2026, the court reconvened, where Shri Saini admitted his lack of evidence to support the initial claim and clarified that his statement was intended to reference a decision in a similar case, specifically MCrC No.6131/2026 (Ramprasad Vishya v. The State of Madhya Pradesh). Realizing the gravity of his remarks, the advocate promptly offered an unconditional apology to the court.
Justice Choubey, acknowledging the advocate's remorse, decided against pursuing contempt charges. Instead, he issued a caution to Shri Saini, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the sanctity and decorum of judicial proceedings. The court reminded the legal fraternity of the critical role of advocates in upholding the dignity of the judicial system and urged careful articulation in submissions to avoid undermining the court's authority.
This incident underscores the delicate balance between assertive advocacy and maintaining respect for judicial processes. The High Court's decision to accept the apology reflects a commitment to preserving judicial integrity while fostering an environment conducive to fair legal practice.
The bail application in question is scheduled for further consideration next week.
Bottom line:-
Advocate's statement in court touching upon judicial functioning and appearing derogatory to the dignity of the court - Unconditional apology tendered by the advocate - Court refrains from initiating contempt proceedings but cautions advocate to maintain sanctity of judicial proceedings and be circumspect while making submissions.
Statutory provision(s): Essential Commodities Act
Jagdish Varkade v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur) : Law Finder Doc id # 2897155
