The Supreme Court Of India on Tuesday unequivocally refused to show any kind of leniency to an Advocate who was challenging the Delhi High Court’s judgement rejecting his plea for reduction of sentence awarded by trial court with regard to an incident wherein the petitioner advocate was abusive towards a female judicial officer.
The bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice Manmohan expressed their displeasure at the conduct of the Advocate, and the offensive language used against a female judicial officer in her own court.
Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court, who decided the revision petition filed by Advocate Sanjay Rathore last month, called it a “deeply disturbing incident”, Justice Sharma noted-
“The present case, the injustice was not directed at a distant litigant or an unknown complainant. It was inflicted upon a sitting female Judicial Officer, within her own courtroom – a space that should embody respect, order, and the majesty of law. Here, where she was entrusted with the solemn duty to dispense “justice without fear or favour”, she was subjected to misconduct, threats, and humiliation by one who, as an advocate, was duty-bound to uphold the dignity of the court.
This is, therefore, not merely a case of individual misbehaviour, but a case where injustice was done to justice itself – where a judge, who symbolizes the impartial voice of the law, became the target of personal attack while discharging her official duties.”
Case Background
At the time of the incident, the complainant Ms. X was serving as a Metropolitan Magistrate in Delhi. On 30.10.2015, at around 3:50 PM, she was presiding over her courtroom on the 6th floor of the Karkardooma Courts Complex (North-East District). A couple of court staff members, one Advocate, a few police officers and two others were present when, the present petitioner Sanjay Rathore entered the courtroom with a colleague, and enquired with the Reader about the status of their challan case. Upon being informed that the case had already been adjourned to 31.10.2015, the petitioner suddenly began shouting in open court.
He allegedly used abusive and disrespectful language towards the presiding judge Ms.X and said “aise kar dia adjourn matter, aise kese date de di, main keh rha hun, abhi lo matter, order karo abhi.” When Ms. X asked him about his vakalatnama, the petitioner arrogantly responded, “dekh lo lga hai challan ke sath mein, usi mein mera naam hai.” His name, indeed, appeared on the vakalatnama attached with the challan. However, instead of calming down, the petitioner became more aggressive. He began shouting louder, creating a nuisance that forced Ms.X to pause the court proceedings. When she reiterated that the matter had already been adjourned, the petitioner allegedly charged towards the dais and began threatening her, stating, “aisa karo matter transfer kar do CMM ko, order karo abhi, aise kaise adjourn kar diya matter.” He further warned her that he would be moving an application to transfer the case. In the presence of court staff and litigants, the petitioner continued to shout threats: “mein tumhari complaint karunga CMM ke pass, mein kal khud hi jaunga High Court, mein dekhta hun tumhe abhi, order karo abhi, dasti do copy.” He thereafter began banging the table repeatedly, attempting to obstruct judicial work.
In her complaint, Ms. X stated that based on his behaviour and speech, she suspected he was under the influence of alcohol. She then directed him to leave the courtroom. However, at this point, he became even more violent and shouted: “mein kahin nahi jaunga, mein dekhta hu kis me dum hai mujhe bahar nikalne ka, tum kah do or mein chal jaun—nahi jaunga bahar.” He then allegedly uttered an extremely offensive and vulgar remark towards the judicial officer.
The complainant then sought the accused’s identification and directed court staff to retain him for a breath analysis. However, before the test could be conducted, the petitioner fled the courtroom while continuing to hurl filthy abuse at her. Deeply shaken by the incident, Ms.X submitted a formal complaint with the police. She alleged that the petitioner herein “had insulted her and had outraged her modesty, being a female judicial officer and had also insulted the court’s dignity.”
Delhi HC Judgment
Justice Sharma noted that the Trial Court has not awarded the maximum sentence permissible under law. Rather, a lenient view has been taken, and a sentence of only one year and six months has been imposed. He said-
“Thus, to this extent, this Court finds no justification to interfere with the order of sentence, which is well within the statutory limits and supported by cogent reasoning.”
However, Court did provide a slight relief to the petitioner by making a modification to the trial court’s order, having the sentences awarded to him run concurrently instead of consecutively.
Finally, refusing any relief to the advocate, Justice Sharma observed-
“To conclude, this Court would observe that to take a lenient view in a case like the present, where shameful language was used against a judicial officer, would amount to doing injustice to justice. The seat of a judicial officer has its own dignity and is sacrosanct for members of the community who appear before her. If such an officer is not able to get adequate justice for herself, it may leave a scar or hurt dignity that cannot be permitted.
When the dignity of any judicial officer is torn by way of use of filthy words proved beyond reasonable doubt, the law must act as the thread that would mend and restore it.”
Supreme Court has now given the Advocate two weeks time to surrender.
Read the Delhi HC Judgment Here
Author: Nitish Kashyap