Scandalous allegations against High Court judge : Lawyers signing pleadings are guilty of contempt.

Supreme Court Accepts Apology in Contempt Case, Warns Against Scandalous Allegations. Alleged contemnors tender apology for scurrilous claims against High Court Judge; Supreme Court emphasizes professional ethics for lawyers.

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has accepted an unconditional apology from alleged contemnors involved in making scandalous allegations against a sitting judge of the High Court of Telangana. This decision marks an important stance on maintaining the dignity and authority of judicial officers and emphasizes the professional responsibilities of lawyers.

The case, titled In Re: N. Peddi Raju and others - Alleged Contemnors, involved a transfer petition where the Supreme Court noted the use of inappropriate language aimed at a High Court judge. The apex court refused to allow the withdrawal of the petition and instead initiated contempt proceedings against the petitioner, Mr. N. Peddi Raju, and associated lawyers.

Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran presided over the matter, emphasizing that such vilification of judges by disgruntled lawyers or litigants threatens the effective administration of justice. The court highlighted the detrimental impact of reckless allegations that create an environment of intimidation, compromising impartial decision-making and public trust in the judiciary.

Upon the Supreme Court's direction, the alleged contemnors approached the High Court judge to tender an apology. The judge accepted their apology, expressing concern over the emerging trend of personal attacks on judges. These attacks, the judge noted, undermine the dignity of courts and the public's confidence in the justice system. The court reiterated that advocates, as officers of the court, hold the responsibility of upholding the court's reputation.

The Supreme Court referred to past judgments underscoring lawyers' duties to prioritize their obligations to the court over client instructions when they conflict. The judgment cited the case of M.Y. Shareef v. Hon'ble Judges of the High Court of Nagpur, which emphasized that lawyers signing pleadings with scandalous content without prima facie grounds are guilty of contempt. The court also drew attention to professional ethics discussions from previous cases, including Rondel v. Worsley and T.V. Choudhary.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court accepted the apology, noting that the majesty of law lies not in punishment but in forgiveness when a mistake is acknowledged. The court closed the contempt proceedings but issued a cautionary note for lawyers to diligently consider the repercussions of signing pleadings with scandalous allegations against judges.

This judgment serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of professional conduct within the legal fraternity and underscores the judiciary's commitment to preserving its integrity and authority.

Statutory provision(s): Contempt of Court Act, 1971

In Re: N. Peddi Raju, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2808892