Thread by @lawbarandbench

#SupremeCourt to hear Advocate Yatin Oza's plea challenging the Gujarat HC full court decision to take away his senior designation status. Justice SK Kaul led bench will hear the case on merits after HC reiterated its decision
#yatinoza #contempt

Sr Adv Abhishekh Manu Singhvi: HC in an appropriate case can and should withdraw the gown for fixed period and not permanently. temporary measures is a part of the temporary and spatial limitation and thus reasonable.

Singhvi: The first punishment need not be death penalty and second punishment need not be life imprisonment and third punishment need not be 10 years imprisonment. here taking away senior gown is professional death penalty

Justice Subhash Reddy: HC says its happening since 2006 and everytime an affidavit is given of apology. How can this happen forever?

Justice Reddy: earlier orders of High Court stated that such behaviour cannot be repeated.

Singhvi: There must be limitations and permanence cannot be an option. reasonableness is at the heart of it. This order hurts the idea of reasonableness. I am objecting to be sent back to HC to apply for a senior gown.

Singhvi reads the doctrine of disproportion as propounded by the top court
#supremecourt

Justice Kaul: At 60 you cannot change your emotiveness Mr Oza. None of us can, what is the ankush you want on yourself which will again now allow you to get in this mess?

Adv Yatin Oza: i had used a very strong word against me

SC: again it was emotive and it was self deprecating. the problem is you don't control your emotions at the correct time

Oza: you can warm me, i can assure the court, for any problem of Bar, i will not go out of channel

Sr Adv Singhvi makes suggestions which Adv Oza can adhere to: Please record his earlier apology and his oral statements in the supreme court. Affidavit be also filed to the same effect

SC: These are affirmations of same thing !

Justice Kaul: My mind says what has happened (taking away senior designation) is right, but my heart says after 100 sins there should be 101 sins or get another chance.

Hearing to resume post lunch
#supremecourt

Sr Adv Arvind Datar: the order of full court has run its course for 13 to 14 months, Your lordships said it can be kept in abeyance provided no such burst of emotions take place.

Datar: My appeal is the contempt conviction can be kept in abeyance but if a similar act happens then let the contempt gets renewed on its own without reference back to the court

SC: We have not taken a final call yet and need some time for consideration

Court suggests let High Court decision be kept in abeyance and let it kick in if he once again commits any transgression.

Nikhil Goel for High Court says two aspects should be considered on that: One that there is no such provision for keeping it in abeyance and two that he tendered apology only after 41 days and had initially defended his statements on merits.

Our (Supreme Court) advantage is Art. 142. We often use 142 to do things which we otherwise find difficult to do: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.

#yatinoza #SupremeCourt

The fine line of appealing to Your Lordships conscience should also be considered in the factual circumstances.

But in this case, look at his conduct even afterwards: Goel

Goel taking the court through the conduct of Oza and his replies to the contempt of court case initiated by HC.

It is after all of that that he apologised. It is not that he tendered the apology at the first instance. And his press conference was not against registry of HC alone but against the institution not HC itself: Goel

Order: We have heard parties. In view of certain submissions, we would like to examine the ramifications of the same.

Court defers matter for further consideration on October 7.

#SupremeCourt

There is a way of doing things and a way of not doing things. There are many things he has done which is not how it should have been done.

What example are we setting for juniors? He is leader of Bar: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Justice Kaul says it might be similar to things that trouble lawyers like Datar or Sundaram and judges across the board with respect to what has happened and has been happening in Chennai Bar.

Even we judges could sometimes we feel registry is not working as we want but there is a way to raise it. We cited example of chennai to state sometimes problem becomes endemic: Justice Kaul

Oza who is present for hearing says 2006 contempt was because I kept on arguing when judges were discussing inter se

Bench rises. Hearing over