#CalcuttaHighCourt 3-Judge Bench hears #contemptcase initiated by Justice Rajasekhar Mantha against protesting lawyers who barred access to his courtroom.
LIVE UPDATES to follow.
#CalcuttaHighCourt: In last occasion, we requested assistance of Bar Councils etc. for identifying (the lawyers who protested). We got the video footage, if Bar Council of WB could identify their name, address, enrolment no.. representatives of three Bars can assist #Contempt
Counsel: If your Lordships may kindly consider somehow to put an end to the matter.
Only one issue, we opened the doors because we were told a cat has come into the courtroom and emitted foul odour, so we had to open the doors, Judge orally responds.
Justice Sivagnanam: I also come from a State where.. it is nothing new about agitations.. I was also an office bearer of an association ... here, an Hon'ble Judge of the Court has been targetted
Justice Sivagnanam recalls that in Gujarat, the bar had gone on agitation, which was not strictly judge-centric, saying judge shouldn't be shifted out of state etc.
Justice Sivagnanam: Even today's ToI says, 9 district judges have been exonerated in contempt
There may be cases where a lawyer may say something out of turn in court, which he later aplogises for. But this is a case where contempt was issued because Judge was targetted, he adds
Justice Sivagnanam: But this is a very.. see, nobody wants to prolong the issue, especially when you are the oldest high court.
Court: The alleged contemnors have to be identified properly, because it is a quasi criminal proceedings.. if 10 guilty peple are acquitted, it is not a problem..so idenitification is very important.
Court: They (alleged contemnors) are going to be heard in the matter, there is no prejudices, no pre-decision.. whatever ld senior counsel has said, we will keep it in mind... one judge has been named, that is very peculiar to this matter.
Court: So for the present, what will do is we will take this report on record.. but we will not open it now ... Let the Bar Council and the Bar view it and then come before the court.
Justice Sivagnanam: What we will do is, we will furnish copy of video footage.. to Bar Council of WB, BCI and 3 Bar Associations.. so you will be able to identify ... After you file reports, we will say what is to be done in the next hearing
Court: In one of the writ petitions filed today, they have impleaded all of them (protesting lawyers)... but we don't know if they are the right people
Court dictates ORDER, records that commissioner of police has submitted a report, that ACP has submitted Electronic certificate regarding CCTV footage as required under Indian Evidence Act.
#CalcuttaHighCourt orders that a copy of the CCTV footage from January 9 be furnished to Bar Council of India, Bar Council of West Bengal and the three Bar Associations so that the lawyers in the footage may be identified.
#CalcuttaHighCourt records that call data is being collected to identify culprits; that data is also collected from printing shops to identify those who ordered for posters that were later posted at the High Court and around the residence of Justice Mantha.
#CalcuttaHighCourt notes Police submission that majority of miscreants in CCTB footage have covered their face with masks which made job of identification a bit difficult.
#CalcuttaHighCourt says it is not convinced with report of Police Commissioner. "Had investigation been more vigorous, by now the miscreants would have been identified."
However, we do not wish to foreclose prayer for more time to identify the culprits, Court adds.
Court also suggests that those lawyers who are seen in the CCTV footage may voluntarily come forward before the committee, "just to save the embarrassment" of court/ committee having to summon them.
Justice Sivagnanam: See, everyone knows everyone, but when it comes to criminal proceedings, we will have to toe the line. This will cause a lot of embarrassment ...
#CalcuttaHighCourt: We have entrusted the Committee to identify... We are not ascribing any blame, that they have participated or not.. just to save embarrassment, those whose faces are there.. let them go tell that their faces are projected in the video.. let committee decide.
Judge: Mr Ghosh, you being the President of the Bar Association, you are primarily an advocate or not?
Lawyer: Yes
Court: And you are an officer of the court. You may be a poltiical but..
Lawyer: No, milord, I have fought the allegation without support of any political party..
Court:... this place, this temple of justice..
Lawyer: We are all aware of how this High Court is used for politics ...
After order dictation, Justice Sivagnanam expresses concern that none of the government lawyers now seem to be appearing in Court number 13, and now Court 16 as well.
Justice Sivagnanam: One more issue, which is bit disturbing for me personally. None of the government lawyers are appearing in Court 13.. this is very very very very bad.. This is happening in court 16.. Have you included court room 16 also?
Justice Sivagnanam: This is very, very bad. Two things happened, the officers carrying files - they are not high rank officers.. half these fellows hold the files upside down.. as a result, the innocent will be affected..
Justice Sivagnanam adds that if an "top-most person" has taken such a decision that government lawyers will not appear in court 13, the Court can be told so that it can pass an order and the party may engage another counsel.
Justice Sivagnanam: Let us assume sir, if they do not appear and court takes an adverse view against the officer and that fellow was under the fond belief that some govt officer will represent him. Why that innocent fellow should suffer?
If government counsel have decided not to appear, at least parties can engage their own counsel. We have a huge panel (state legal services panel), Court points out.
Court says that someone has already raised a related issue.
Justice Sivagnanam: He has written a stinker to the CJ ... I gave a reply saying that statutory committee continues to exist..Inspite of that reply, a second stinker has come. it wont take long to give a befitting reply
If someone wants to close their eyes, let them close their eyes. Why say all these things - "majesty of court" etc. let us throw all these things to Hugli (if this is the state of affairs), Court remarks.
It is not only the judges who hold the majesty of the Court. It is also the lawyers, by their erudition, their knowledge. It is the dignity of the court that holds it up in front of people, Court says.
Court says if govt lawyers are not going to appear in Court 13, at least a circular should be issued of such decision
Lawyer: This decision has not be taken
Court: It has! This can happen in 13, it can happen in 16... this is unacceptable ... The ultimate sufferor is the state!
Justice Sivagnanam: Assume it's my court, and officer is not able to speak proper English (and I don't understand Hindi or Bengali).. I need to ... depend on what is the understanding in the official file.
Justice Sivagnanam recalls another Judge faced similar issues, where he was transferred and not able to understand the vernacular language in which the case files were written. The Judge had to depend entirely on his co-Judge.
Another lawyers says a name was removed from the panel list overnight over appearance in court 13
Judge: At least do something.. You do something. If you say none of them will appear and there is some directive.. or they themselves take a decision not to appear, issue a circular
Issue a circular to let all the DMs, the police know that they have to fend themselves in those courts, Court suggests.
Court: This will be indirectly obstructing the course of justice.
Justice Sivagnanam refers to newspaper reports on yesterday's early morning hearing at the #SupremeCourt (concerning the appointment of Justice #VictoriaGowri)
That is not new to my parent High Court (Madras HC), he remarks. Every appointment of AAG, AG is called into question
Justice Sivagnanam: ... But the moment everything is over, Judge is sworn in, the very same counsel will come and appear... and that the Judge does not have any bias, he has got no ill feelings.
Justice Sivagnanam: Sir, young members of the Bar suffer ..(especially during COVID)... I've seen people virtually crying. They had some quasi govt panel etc... the money was not coming through, no filing ... Virtually they are on the streets.
Justice Sivagnanam: This may not affect lawyers with 10-15 years standing, who has big set of solicitors briefing them, etc. But there is a dark side to it.. Probably they appear to be well-dressed, thats why we have got a black coat and gown
Justice Sivagnanam recalls that during COVID, remand was being done online. He recounts telling then #MadrasHC CJ AP Sahi that this would affect law practice in courts
Justice Sivagnanam: I will show you a list of lawyers who died during this period (COVID). Not by age. Age group between 35 to less than 50. Most of them, the doctors said, out of anguish.
Rishab Shetty and Vijay Kiragandur, the director and producer respectively of Kannada movie Kantara move #SupremenCourt challenging anticipatory bail condition imposed by Kerala HC where production before IO on Sundays was mandated
The petitioners were booked for copyright infringement over the song Varaha Roopam
Sr Adv Ranjit Kumar appears for petitioners
CJI DY Chandrachud: We will take this up before we rise for today #SupremeCourt
CJI: you are using this music in Kantara?
Singh: yes they are saying it is from Vara Roopam
Justice PS Narasimha: But this is movie is there for a year #Kantara
Constitution bench of the #SupremeCourt Constitution Bench to deliver verdict on the petitions challenging the validity of the All India Bar Exam #AIBE
The three main issues which the judgment will answer are:
Can the Bar Council of India (BCI) prescribe a pre-enrolment exam as a condition precedent for enrolment?
Can BCI prescribe pre-enrolment training in terms of its training rules issued in 1995?
The last issue for consideration was: If a pre-enrolment exam is not permitted, can BCI prescribe a post-enrolment exam in alignment with Section 49 (1) (ah) of Advocates Act, 1961?
#SupremeCourt Constitution Bench of Justices Kaul, Khanna, Abhay S Oka, Vikram Nath and JK Maheshwari will deliver judgment on whether the #Bohra community has the right to excommunicate dissidents in exercise of its fundamental rights under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution
The top court will lay down the law regarding the correctness of its 1962 judgment in Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin v. The State Of Bombay, in which it had protected the rights of the Bohra community to excommunicate members #SupremeCourt#Bohra
Court: Decision of constitution bench requires reconsideration. We have recorded reasons. There are two grounds.
Gujarat High Court reserves orders in a petition by Gujarat University challenging direction to furnish copies of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's degree certificate to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta for the University argued before bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav.
SG: There is nothing to hide as the degree is there in public domain, on social media etc. But we cannot be compelled to disclose the information. @PMOIndia
SG: We cannot be asked to furnish the information to satisfy someone's childish and irresponsible curiousity. Also, it should be noted that the info sought has nothing to do with his (Narendra Modi's) role as a public figure. @PMOIndia@ArvindKejriwal
TMC MP @jawharsircar on Law Ministry stating that differences of opinion between executive and judiciary are mutually reconciled: So am I to understand that all differences are mutually reconciled?...
...And in the same sentence you have used the words, "Only the appropriate person is appointed as a judge". Do you consider Victoria Gowri's appointment to really (be of) an appropriate person? One who has been accused in public of casteist remarks, of remarks against minorities?