The Apogee
The Apogee
  • Home
  • From Courts
  • Global
  • Technology
  • Business
  • Law
  • Judgements
    • High Court
    • Supreme Court
  • Achievers
  • Video
  • More
    • Interviews
    • Opinion/Features
    • Research
    • Science
    • Environs
    • Health
  • test-series
  1. Home
  2. From Courts
  3. Unmitigated attack on majesty, honesty of courts: Delhi HC warns litigant for misusing Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
 Unmitigated attack on majesty, honesty of courts: Delhi HC warns litigant for misusing Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
Delhi High Court. (File Photo: IANS)
From Courts Trending

Unmitigated attack on majesty, honesty of courts: Delhi HC warns litigant for misusing Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

by Newsdesk November 7, 2023

AA

New Delhi, Nov 7 (IANS) The Delhi High Court on Tuesday expressed strong disapproval of actions of one litigant, labelling them as an “unmitigated attack on the majesty and honesty of the courts.”

Justice Jasmeet Singh, presiding over the case, warned Vijay Kumar Agarwal for misusing the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

He sought contempt action against a district court judge on the ground that his grievances were not duly addressed.

The judge said that courts are constitutional institutions responsible for preserving and safeguarding the rights and liberties of all citizens with utmost vigilance and caution.

While the court refrained from initiating contempt proceedings against Agarwal, it issued a stern warning against the misuse and abuse of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Justice Singh’s decision was influenced by Agarwal’s statement that he was suffering from neurological issues.

He pointed out that the Constitution of India and the legal framework of the country provide adequate safeguards for challenging court decisions, making the pursuit of contempt against a judge in an individual capacity an unwarranted attack on the integrity of the courts.

Agarwal had attempted to employ contempt proceedings to seek an explanation from the Additional District Judge for a decision made in a civil suit.

The court clarified that entertaining such petitions would compel the judge to file a reply, which is impermissible.

The court stated that if Agarwal disagreed with the judge’s order, he should utilise the legal remedies available to challenge it rather than seeking contempt proceedings.

The court also refused to initiate contempt proceedings against the private respondent’s counsel, recognising the importance of the independence of the legal profession.

In conclusion, the plea was dismissed, with Agarwal granted the liberty to pursue appropriate legal remedies against the order with which he was aggrieved.

Previous post
Next post

Latest Post

From Courts

Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court quashes false rape and dowry case against would be husband

May 13, 2024
From Courts

SC asks Patanjali to place on record IMA chief’s interview terming apex court observations as ‘unfortunate’

April 30, 2024
From Courts

Delhi HC restrains Ashneer Grover from creating third party rights in BharatPe shares

April 30, 2024
Global

AstraZeneca admits Covishield jab raises TTS risk. Should you be worried?

April 30, 2024
Copyright © 2026 Qoxag. All Right Reserved.
Go to mobile version