[ad_1]
NEW DELHI: Legal professionals submitting petitions on behalf of litigants could be accountable for contempt of court docket proceedings if the plaint contained derogatory remarks in opposition to judges, the Supreme Court docket has mentioned and issued contempt of court docket notices to an advocate-petitioner and his advocate-on-record, who filed a plea within the apex court docket.
“Subject discover, returnable on December 2, to the petitioner Mohan Chandra P, in addition to the advocate-on-record Vipin Kumar Jai, as to why an motion for contempt of the court docket be not initiated in opposition to them. Each the above-named individuals shall stay current within the court docket on December 2,” ordered a bench of Justices B R Gavai and B V Nagarathna.
Pursuant to a notification of August 7, 2018, issued by the Karnataka Data Fee, advocate Mohan Chandra had utilized for the posts of chief data commissioner in addition to state data commissioner. The choice committee beneficial three individuals for the CIC in addition to IC which didn’t embrace the title of Chandra. He filed an enchantment in opposition to the choice course of, appointment of CIC and IC, whereas questioning his non-appointment to the marketed posts earlier than the Karnataka HC.
A single choose bench of the HC dismissed his petition on April 21 this 12 months. Chandra filed an enchantment in opposition to this order earlier than a division bench of the HC, which on September 2 rejected the plea with a price of Rs 5 lakh. Within the particular depart petition earlier than the SC, Chandra mentioned, “The explanation assigned by the division bench of the Karnataka HC for extraneous motive and to harass the respondents is unwarranted one and with none foundation or basis to justify the samen (sic). Then again, the division bench has considered extraneous causes and as a revenge imposed an exemplary value of Rs 5 lakh to the petitioner.”
The petitioner made insinuations in opposition to the judges accusing them of dismissing the plea for reasonable publicity.
“Subject discover, returnable on December 2, to the petitioner Mohan Chandra P, in addition to the advocate-on-record Vipin Kumar Jai, as to why an motion for contempt of the court docket be not initiated in opposition to them. Each the above-named individuals shall stay current within the court docket on December 2,” ordered a bench of Justices B R Gavai and B V Nagarathna.
Pursuant to a notification of August 7, 2018, issued by the Karnataka Data Fee, advocate Mohan Chandra had utilized for the posts of chief data commissioner in addition to state data commissioner. The choice committee beneficial three individuals for the CIC in addition to IC which didn’t embrace the title of Chandra. He filed an enchantment in opposition to the choice course of, appointment of CIC and IC, whereas questioning his non-appointment to the marketed posts earlier than the Karnataka HC.
A single choose bench of the HC dismissed his petition on April 21 this 12 months. Chandra filed an enchantment in opposition to this order earlier than a division bench of the HC, which on September 2 rejected the plea with a price of Rs 5 lakh. Within the particular depart petition earlier than the SC, Chandra mentioned, “The explanation assigned by the division bench of the Karnataka HC for extraneous motive and to harass the respondents is unwarranted one and with none foundation or basis to justify the samen (sic). Then again, the division bench has considered extraneous causes and as a revenge imposed an exemplary value of Rs 5 lakh to the petitioner.”
The petitioner made insinuations in opposition to the judges accusing them of dismissing the plea for reasonable publicity.
[ad_2]
Source link
