2011 (5) TMI 1123 - SC - Indian Laws

Guilty of criminal contempt - Offence punishable u/s 12 r/w Sections 15 and 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 ( the Act ) - order of conviction and sentence passed - before the Magistrate, unfortunate incident had occurred, tendered apology and regret for their action, prayed for leniency and setting aside the order of the High Court sentencing the contemnors to jail - Controversial behaviour of the Contemnors - Before considering the acceptability of the affidavits filed by the appellants, in order to visualize seriousness of the matter, it is useful to refer the exchange of words and behaviour of the appellants (in English version) while the Magistrate remanded the accused Soran to police custody. ''When all the officers were sitting in the chamber of the Magistrate, they over-heard Mr. Prashar shouting in the Court in loud voice saying, You are indulging in gangism. You are passing orders of your choice. The contempt can not harm me. I will see to it as to how you remain in service. The role and status of lawyers at the beginning of Sovereign and Democratic India is accounted as extremely vital in deciding that the Nation's administration was to be governed by the Rule of Law. They were considered intellectuals amongst the elites of the country and social activists amongst the downtrodden. The role of lawyers in the framing of the Constitution needs no special mention. In a profession with such a vivid history it is regretful, to say the least, to witness instances of the nature of the present kind. Lawyers are the officers of the Court in the administration of justice. HELD THAT - Considering the plea made by Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel and President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, in tendering unconditional apology, recorded even at the initial stage before the High Court and before the Magistrate, Faridabad before whom the unwanted incident had occurred and the present affidavits filed before us once again expressing unconditional apology and regret with an undertaking that they would maintain good behaviour in future and in view of the language used in proviso' and explanation' appended to Section 12(1), we accept the affidavits filed by all the Appellants. Considering the fact that the newspaper has merely published what had happened in the Court, we are of the view that it would be just and fair to apply the same relief to him also. We reiterate that acceptance of an apology from a contemnor should only be a matter of exception and not that of a rule. A Court, be that of a Magistrate or the Supreme Court is sacrosanct. The integrity and sanctity of an institution which has bestowed upon itself the responsibility of dispensing justice is ought to be maintained. All the functionaries, be it advocates, judges and the rest of the staff ought to act in accordance with morals and ethics. Advocates Role and Ethical Standards - ''An advocate shall not stand as a surety, or certify the soundness of a surety for his client required for the purpose of any legal proceedings. Advocates have a large responsibility towards the society. A client's relationship with his/her advocate is underlined by utmost trust. An advocate is expected to act with utmost sincerity and respect. In all professional functions, an advocate should be diligent and his conduct should also be diligent and should conform to the requirements of the law by which an advocate plays a vital role in the preservation of society and justice system. An advocate is under an obligation to uphold the rule of law and ensure that the public justice system is enabled to function at its full potential. Any violation of the principles of professional ethics by an advocate is unfortunate and unacceptable.

Issues Involved:
1. Criminal contempt of court by advocates.
2. Unconditional apology and its acceptability.
3. Professional conduct and ethical standards of advocates.
4. Role of advocates in the judiciary and society.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Criminal Contempt of Court by Advocates
The appeals arose from a common judgment by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which found the appellants guilty of criminal contempt under Section 12 read with Sections 15 and 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The incident involved abusive and threatening behavior by advocates towards a Judicial Magistrate during court proceedings. The Magistrate had remanded an accused to police custody, which led to the advocates hurling abuses, making derogatory remarks, and threatening the Magistrate with dire consequences. The High Court, after reviewing the incident and the conduct of the advocates, imposed sentences of simple imprisonment and fines.

Issue 2: Unconditional Apology and Its Acceptability
The appellants filed affidavits tendering unconditional apologies and expressing regret for their actions. They also appeared before the Magistrate and the High Court to apologize. The Supreme Court considered the affidavits and the seriousness of the incident. The Court noted that under Section 12(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, an apology can lead to discharge or remission of punishment if it is made to the satisfaction of the court. The Court accepted the apologies, considering them bona fide and noting the appellants' commitment to good behavior in the future.

Issue 3: Professional Conduct and Ethical Standards of Advocates
The judgment emphasized the duties of advocates towards the court and society, referencing various Supreme Court decisions and the Bar Council of India Rules. Advocates are expected to conduct themselves with dignity and self-respect, maintain a respectful attitude towards the courts, and avoid influencing court decisions through improper means. The Court highlighted the importance of professional ethics and the need for advocates to uphold the dignity of the judiciary. It cited past cases where advocates were penalized for contemptuous behavior, stressing that such conduct undermines the administration of justice.

Issue 4: Role of Advocates in the Judiciary and Society
The judgment underscored the critical role of advocates in the administration of justice and their responsibility towards society. Advocates are seen as officers of the court and play a vital role in upholding the rule of law. The Court reiterated that freedom of expression for advocates comes with the duty to maintain decorum and respect in court proceedings. The judgment also called for the legal fraternity to set an example for other professionals by adhering to ethical standards and professional conduct.

Conclusion
The Supreme Court, while accepting the unconditional apologies of the appellants, emphasized the importance of maintaining the integrity and sanctity of the judiciary. The judgment serves as a reminder of the high standards of conduct expected from advocates and the need for the legal profession to uphold the dignity of the courts. The appeals were disposed of with the acceptance of the apologies and the discharge of the appellants.

← Previous Next →