Justice Rajasekhar Mantha of the high court issued on Thursday a contempt of court rule against lawyers who took part in an agitation outside his courtroom on January 9 to protest the judge’s alleged bias in favour of BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari.
Thursday’s order said: “There has been a clear attempt to interfere with the justice delivery system of this Constitutional Court by the said section of the Advocates and persons by locking up the courtroom from outside and preventing access to the courtroom to lawyers, litigants and court staff.”
A section of lawyers had demonstrated outside Justice Mantha’s courtroom and boycotted proceedings in cases listed to be heard by him on Monday and Tuesday to protest the alleged bias. The protesting lawyers also allegedly prevented other lawyers from entering Justice Mantha’s courtroom.
Posters with Justice Mantha’s photograph and listing the allegations against him were pasted on the walls outside his courtroom also outside his Jodhpur Park house. Kolkata police have registered two cases in connection with the posters.
Justice Mantha’s order on Thursday said the allegations mentioned in the posters were“false, misleading and baseless”.
The order also said the conduct of some of the advocates who had locked up the courtroom from outside and put up defamatory posters “has shaken the confidence of the Community in the justice delivery system”.
The judge held that the activities of the advocates amounted to contempt of court.“In view of the above, this Court issues a Suo Motu Rule of contempt against the said advocates and the concerned persons,” the order said.
According to the rule, the lawyers who will be identified as guilty could be barred from practising law for a few months. “A lawyer can be suspended for three to six months if found guilty in the contempt proceedings,” said a senior advocate.
Justice Mantha observed that the registrar-general of the court could identify the advocates from the CCTV footage of the actions outside Court Room number 13 — where the judge holds his hearings — on Monday and Tuesday.
“The aforesaid acts constitute criminal contempt with the meaning of Section 2(C) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. In terms of Section 18 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, Criminal Contempt proceedings must be heard by a bench of two or more Judges. This is a matter of grave importance concerning the dignity of this Court,” Justice Mantha observed.
