Constitutional courts take tough stand on advocates crossing lakshman rekha

NEW DELHI: Tested to the limits by a band of lawyers who for years constantly pushed the boundaries of decency while criticising the judiciary, the constitutional courts appear to have had enough and recent contempt proceedings against renowned lawyers are indicative of attempts to demand adherence to 'lakshman rekha' of decency.
Days after reserving its decision on two contempt proceedings against activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan, the Supreme Court on Thursday was disinclined to close a contempt case against Gujarat High Court Advocates Association President Yatin Narendra Oza, whose senior advocate designation was revoked by the HC for his allegations of nepotism, favouritism and other allegations against the HC registry, which appeared to cloud even the HC's judicial side.
Oza had engaged a battery of senior advocates - A M Singhvi, Arvind Datar, P H Parekh and Shekhar Naphade. SCBA president Dushyant Dave joined in suo motu to plead for Oza. But Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ajay Rastogi made clear their disappointment with Oza's repeated contumacious utterances. "You are a 60-year-old bar leader. We can understand rash comments and behaviour from youngsters. But, bar leaders are to guide youngsters. What example are you setting for them? How many times will you apologise? You have a history of that."
A mild hint of a question on HC's harshness in taking away Oza's 'senior advocate' designation met with the bench's strong response. "Let contempt proceedings in HC culminate, we will keep the matter pending. Such a situation has happened in Delhi High Court (stripping R K Anand of senior advocate gown) and it has been upheld by the Supreme Court."
As the going got tough, a remorseful Oza stepped in and said, "I used absolutely intemperate language (in the press conference). I tender unconditional and unqualified apology. I seek forgiveness." Singhvi said, "it is a matter of life and death for a senior advocate to be stripped of his hard earned designation." The bench matter of factly said, "He can still practice."
Oza said, "I was the youngest lawyer to be designated senior advocate by the HC at the age of 38 years. The number of days I have been without the senior advocate designation is enough punishment. I promise to the court, it will never ever happen." Oza was designated as senior advocate on October 25, 1999 and the HC on July 18 this year stripped him of the designation for his remarks about HC as a 'gambling den' among other contemptuous utterances.
Finding Oza's remorse convincing and persuaded by the pleadings of senior advocates, the bench of Justices Kaul and Rastogi in their order said "in view of the unconditional and unqualified apology, the contempt court would consider Oza's unqualified and unconditional apology. The bench also said that Oza would make a representation to the court that he should not be deprived of the 'senior gown' for all time to come. SC asked Oza to make amends in his approach and guide the younger generation lawyers.