0704 04 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS CASE: L.D. JAIKWAL VS STATE OF U.P
17 MAY 1984
Case Name: L D Jaikwal vs State Of U.P
Equivalent Citations: 1984 AIR 1374, 1984 SCR (3) 833
Date Of Judgement: 17 May 1984
Bench: Thakkar, M.P. (J), SEN, A.P. (J)
Petitioner: L.D. Jaikwal
Respondent: State of U.P.
Act Involved: Contempt of Courts Act 1971, Section 2(c) (1)
Advocate making written application couched in scurrilous language-Imputation-Judge “A Corrupt Judge” and “contaminating the seat of justice”.
High Court convicting and sentencing advocate for contempt of Court appeal to Supreme Court Written apology tendered to Judge 'as directed by the Supreme Court', whether sufficient to set aside conviction by High Court.
Facts:
1. Adv L D Jailwal’s Client was convicted by Ld. Special Judge, Dehradun.
2. Advocate was required to appear before Ld. Special judge to make his submission on question of sentence to be imposed on his client who was accused u/s 5(2) of Prevention of corruption act.
3. Advocate appeared in shirt and trouser in disregard to rule which require him to appear in court attire while appearing in professional capacity.
4. Ld. Special judge told him to leave the court and come back in proper court attire.
5. Because of his instruction from Ld. Judge, Advocate got annoyed and left the court
6. Some other advocate appeared on his case on behalf of accused.
7. Ld. Judge delivered his judgement on the case and imposed sentence of 4 years rigorous imprisonment on the accused (i.e. Adv. L D Jaikwal’s Client)
8. As per provision under law, Adv L D Jaikwal and his client had an option to appeal to high court against the order of special court.
9. At this point, Adv L D Jaikwal, who was senior advocate of long standing and no and immature advocate, made a written application to the special judge worded in scurrilous language making imputation that the judge was “Corrupt Judge” and that he was “contaminating the seat of justice”
Issue:
Whether making such application by and advocate after the matter is disposed by a judge making imputation/charges and threatening a judge amount to contempt of Court?
Decision of Allahabad High Court:
Based on contempt of court proceedings initiated against the Advocate Allahabad High Court found the advocate guilty of having committed Criminal Contempt under section 2 c (i) of the Contempt of Court Act,1971
High Court Imposed the sentence of 1 week of simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.500.
Appeal by L D Jaikwal in Supreme Court:
Aggrieved by the decision of Allahabad high court, Adv L.D Jaikwal made an appeal to Supreme court.
Decision of Supreme Court/ Judgement
Appellant Advocate had not tendered an apology to high court but expressed his sorrow before supreme court saying that he had lost his mental balance.
Supreme court was reluctant to hear him. Then appellant prayed for the time of 3 weeks so that he can rendered an apology to the Ld. Special Court Judge and court accepted and allowed him.
After this appellant appeared before Ld. Special Judge & tendered written apology stating, “He is apologizing as directed by Hon’ble Supreme Court” The circumstances clearly showed that he was not sorry, it was just a paper apology. Expression of sorry came from his pen and not from the heart. There is one thing “to say sorry” and to feel sorry”
“Supreme Court is of the opinion that the High court was therefore justified in imposing a substantive sentence and sentence imposed cannot be said to be excessive or out of proportion. An Appeal is accordingly dismissed”
No comments:
Post a Comment