Nagpur: Dismissing contempt action against 11 lawyers, the Nagpur bench of Bombay high court expressed “regret” that it can’t undo the damage caused to the lawyers concerned and the agony they were required to go through for no reason.
While passing strictures on the HC judge who passed the contempt order, a division bench comprising justices Bhushan Gavai and Murlidhar Giratkar tersely stated that observations made by him were totally contrary to the material on record. “While making such drastic observations, which have the effect of adversely affecting careers of promising lawyers, some sort of caution and circumspection ought to have been exercised by him.”
The bench, however, clarified that they were not finding any fault with the single judge’s order. “On the contrary, we find that his order was most equitable and judicious, since he didn’t want to disturb the services of the employees, working for a long period. However, the lawyers as well as judges are human beings, and not bestowed with a memory to recollect what happened in every proceeding,” it said.
The stern observations came while hearing a suo motu contempt plea by the HC alleging that the respondent lawyers colluded with Gadchiroli Zilla Parishad officials to seek favourable orders from the court regarding recruitment in ZP. After the HC delivered first order in a related case in 2005, three more petitions were filed through respondent lawyers, challenging the recruitment process.
Justices Gavai and Giratkar said there was nothing to even remotely come to the conclusion that there was any foul play on the lawyers’ part, or playing fraud on HC and obtaining orders by suppression. “Had there been any collusion between the lawyer represented by senior counsel Sunil Manohar, and another one by senior counsel Chandrashekhar Kaptan, then, all the three petitions ought to have been filed through the single respondent.”
“The least that the judge should have done was to give notice to these lawyers before making any observation with regard to their conduct. Had he called upon the lawyers, they could have assisted the court. May be after perusing the record, he would have come to the some other conclusion, instead of passing such a drastic order. We’re sure that he must not have intended to cause any harm to the lawyers, but in a spur of moment, he might have passed the contempt order against them,” the bench added, before dropping contempt charges against 11 lawyers.
