Judicial court in Gujarat finds legal professional guilty of repeatedly accusing judges of wrongdoing
In a landmark decision, the Gujarat High Court has sentenced advocate Devesh Bhatt to three months' imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹1 lakh for making scandalous and baseless allegations against sitting judges, Chief Justices, and judicial officers.
The hearing was presided over by Justices AS Supehia and RT Vachhani, who took suo motu cognisance of Bhatt's actions. The Court observed that Bhatt's actions amounted to interference with the administration of justice and pending judicial proceedings, constituting "criminal contempt" under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Bhatt's transgressions included issuing over 52 letters and communications accusing judges of misconduct, corruption, and caste bias, and even writing to the President of India seeking sanction to prosecute them. The Court noted that these actions tended to scandalize the court and undermined public confidence in the judiciary.
The Court also directed the forfeiture of ₹5,00,000/- with accrued interest previously deposited by Bhatt for breach of undertaking. The sentencing was due to Bhatt's continued defamatory conduct despite numerous opportunities to appear in court consistently.
The legal basis for sentencing an advocate for such conduct is firmly rooted in the constitutionally mandated contempt jurisdiction and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Act empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to punish for contempt of court, and it defines criminal contempt to include any act or publication which scandalizes or tends to scandalize the court, prejudices or interferes with judicial proceedings, or obstructs the administration of justice.
The Court reiterated the importance of punishing attacks on judges and emphasized the need to uphold the rule of law. The sentencing serves as a reminder that the judiciary will not tolerate baseless, scandalous allegations that undermine its integrity and the administration of justice.
Amicus curiae and Senior Advocate Asim Pandya recommended the maximum penalty under the Contempt of Courts Act. The Court also imposed a cost of ₹1,00,000/- under Rule 21 of the Contempt of Courts (Gujarat High Court) Rules, 1984.
The sentencing of Bhatt is a significant step in upholding the dignity and authority of the judiciary and maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice. It serves as a warning to all advocates and individuals that making baseless, scandalous allegations against judges will not be tolerated and will be met with severe consequences.
[1] Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 [2] Madhya Pradesh High Court case law [3] Articles 129 and 215 of the Indian Constitution [4] Criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
The Court's sentencing of advocate Devesh Bhatt, for making baseless allegations against judicial officers, highlights the significance of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, particularly criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Act. This sentencing is also rooted in the constitutionally mandated contempt jurisdiction and the importance of maintaining the dignity and integrity of the judiciary, as well as upholding public confidence in the administration of justice.
