जस्टिस आशीष चव्हाण ने दिशा सालियान मामले की सुनवाई से खुद को अलग कर लिया है। उन्होंने इसका कारण यह बताया कि जिस सोसाइटी में […]
Category: Bombay High Court
Justice Aashish Chavan has recused himself from hearing the Disha Salian matter by giving reason that he owns a flat in the same society where Disha Salian died.
Now the matter will be heard by the Bench of Justice Smt. Bharti Dangre and Justice Smt. Manjusha Deshpande. This is the second High Court […]
![Contempt is among the most misinterpreted and misutilised branches of law. The Court, as protector of the fundamental rights, liberties, and freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution, cannot invoke its contempt jurisdiction to silence constructive criticism or public-interest advocacy for judicial reform. The Court must protect not only the speech it favours, but equally the speech it finds unpalatable when directed against itself. Debate on public issues must remain uninhibited, robust, and wide open. – Judges must exercise caution before invoking it, since acting contrary to law and binding precedent in doing so may itself expose them to liability. [Bar Council of India v. High Court of Kerala, (2004) 6 SCC 311, Hari Das v. State of W.B., (1964) 7 SCR 237, Legal Remembrancer v. Matilal Ghose, (1914) ILR 41 Cal 173, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj v. Attorney General of Trinidad & Tobago, (1978) 2 WLR 902 ; McLeod v. St. Aubyn, [1899] AC 549 ; Walmik Bobde v. State of Maharashtra, 2001 ALL MR (Cri) 1731; R.S. Tamilvendan v. The Secretary, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 219 ]](https://youngadvocatescouncil.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/2_03_59_58_supreme-court-_1_H@@IGHT_0_W@@IDTH_600.webp)
Contempt is among the most misinterpreted and misutilised branches of law. The Court, as protector of the fundamental rights, liberties, and freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution, cannot invoke its contempt jurisdiction to silence constructive criticism or public-interest advocacy for judicial reform. The Court must protect not only the speech it favours, but equally the speech it finds unpalatable when directed against itself. Debate on public issues must remain uninhibited, robust, and wide open. – Judges must exercise caution before invoking it, since acting contrary to law and binding precedent in doing so may itself expose them to liability. [Bar Council of India v. High Court of Kerala, (2004) 6 SCC 311, Hari Das v. State of W.B., (1964) 7 SCR 237, Legal Remembrancer v. Matilal Ghose, (1914) ILR 41 Cal 173, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj v. Attorney General of Trinidad & Tobago, (1978) 2 WLR 902 ; McLeod v. St. Aubyn, [1899] AC 549 ; Walmik Bobde v. State of Maharashtra, 2001 ALL MR (Cri) 1731; R.S. Tamilvendan v. The Secretary, 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 219 ]
The taking of cognizance of a frivolous charge of contempt may attract liability under Sections 166, 219, 211, 120(B), 34, and 107 of the Indian […]
Suppression or Withholding of Binding Precedents Favouring the Opposite Party, and Reliance on Overruled Judgments, Is Not Merely a Matter of Professional Misconduct and Criminal Contempt. The Supreme Court’s Recognition of Binding Precedents as Legal Evidence Raises the Applicability of Sections 230, 231 and 246 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Carrying Punishment of Imprisonment Up to Seven Years Relating to Suppression of Legal Evidence, Fabrication and Use of False Evidence, and Dishonestly Making False Claims Before a Court, Punishable with Imprisonment Up to Seven Years. [M/s Eminent Colonizers Private Limited v. Rajasthan Housing Board & Ors., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 148; Kusha Duruka v. State of Odisha, (2024) 4 SCC 432; Samson Arthur v. Quinn Logistic India Pvt. Ltd., 2015 SCC OnLine Hyd 403]
Adv. Nilesh Ojha-Sanvidhani, Chairman , Indian Bar Association. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly held, and most recently in M/s Eminent Colonizers Private Limited v. […]
Why Recusal Applications Alleging Personal Bias, Misconduct, Conflict of Interest, or Judicial Disqualification Must Be Determined by Another Judge, and Why Failure to Follow This Rule Vitiates the Proceedings.
A Critical and Important Principle of Natural Justice and Judicial Impartiality Often Overlooked, Misunderstood, or Insufficiently Addressed in Judicial Proceedings An Analysis of Blondine Surratt, […]
आप ‘जस्टिस’ नहीं बल्कि ‘दलाल’ हैं; अपने नाम के आगे से ‘जस्टिस’ हटाइए और उसकी जगह ‘दलाल’ लिखिए!” — उद्धव ठाकरे गुट के प्रवक्ता संजय राउत की वर्तमान एवं पूर्व मुख्य न्यायाधीशों सहित देश के सभी न्यायाधीशों के प्रति चौंकाने वाली, बेलगाम और संविधान-विरोधी मांग
सभी न्यायाधीशों पर, विशेष रूप से भारत के वर्तमान मुख्य न्यायाधीश न्यायमूर्ति सूर्यकांत तथा पूर्व मुख्य न्यायाधीश न्यायमूर्ति भूषण गवई, न्यायमूर्ति संजीव खन्ना, न्यायमूर्ति उदय […]
“न्यायाधीशांनो, तुम्ही ‘जस्टिस’ नाही, तर ‘दलाल’ आहात; नावापुढील ‘जस्टिस’ काढून टाका आणि ‘दलाल’ हे संबोधन लावा!” – उद्धव ठाकरेंचे प्रवक्ते संजय राऊतांची विद्यमान आणि माजी सरन्यायाधीशांसह देशाच्या सर्व न्यायाधीशांना धक्कादायक, बेताल आणि घटनाविरोधी मागणी
सर्व न्यायाधीशांवर, विशेषतः भारताचे विद्यमान सरन्यायाधीश न्यायमूर्ती सूर्यकांत तसेच माजी सरन्यायाधीश न्यायमूर्ती भूषण गवई, संजीव खन्ना, उदय यू. ललित यांच्यावर संजय राऊत यांचे बेछूट आरोप […]
“CALL YOURSELVES ‘DALAL’, NOT ‘JUSTICE’: SANJAY RAUT’S SHOCKING DEMAND TO SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT JUDGES, INCLUDING THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA”
He Sent a Public Message to All Judges That They Must Stop Using the Prefix “Justice” Before Their Names and Replace It With “Dalal” — […]
‘Bar & Bench’ Caught Flattering — Collegium’s Decision Exposes the Lies! Justice Revati Mohite-Dere didnt considered for Elevation! The Mask of Paid Journalism Torn Off — Corruption Charges Suppressed in news article, Songs of Praise Sung! Bar Associations Aggressive — Demand for CBI Inquiry!
The Collegium overlooked her name, a petition for criminal action is pending before the High Court — and ‘Bar & Bench’s’ dishonesty stands exposed before […]
‘बार अँड बेंच’ने केली चापलुसी — कॉलेजियमच्या निर्णयाने खोटेपणा उघड! न्यायमूर्ती रेवती मोहिते-डेरे यांना पदोन्नती नाहीच — डावललेच!
पेड जर्नालिझमचा बुरखा फाटला — भ्रष्टाचाराचे आरोप दडवले, स्तुतीचे पोवाडे गायले! ववकील संघटना आक्रमक — सीबीआय चौकशीची जोरदार मागणी! दिनांक १२ जानेवारी २०२६ रोजी ‘बार […]