Attributing political colours to judgments and attacking judges in media is contempt of gravest form: Supreme Court

  • The apex court judgement authored by Justice Arun Mishra said that political motives can't be attributed to judges and judiciary

  • Justice Mishra was targeted for delivering certain judgments in favour of the current dispensation

  • The bench, which also comprised Justice Vineet Saran, observed that judges who are attacked are not supposed to go to press or media to ventilate their point of view

The Supreme Court came down heavily on activist lawyers for attacking judges and attributing political colours to judgments, calling it the contempt of gravest form.

The apex court judgement authored by Justice Arun Mishra said that political motives can't be attributed to judges and judiciary. Complaints can be lodged against judges at a proper forum but they can't be attacked in the media over unfavourable judgments, the judgment said. "Lawyers shouldn't try to influence judgments through debates in the press," it read.

 Attributing political colours to judgments and attacking judges in media is contempt of gravest form: Supreme Court

File image of the Supreme Court. AP

Recently, Mishra was targeted for delivering certain judgments in favour of the current dispensation.

"Whenever any political matter comes to the Court and is decided either way, political insinuations are attributed by unscrupulous persons/advocates. Such acts are nothing, but an act of denigrating the judiciary itself and destroys the faith of the common man which he reposes in the judicial system." the top court observed in its judgment quashing Rules 14A to 14D of the Rules of High Court of Madras, 1970.

According to the report, Mishra further observed that some advocates feel that they are above the Bar Council due to its inaction and they are the "only champion of the causes". "The hunger for cheap publicity is increasing which is not permitted by the noble ideals cherished by the great doyens of the bar, they have set by their conduct what should be in fact the professional etiquettes and ethics which are not capable of being defined in a narrow compass," he observed.

"The statutory rules prohibit advocates from advertising and in fact to cater to the press/media, distorted versions of the court proceedings is sheer misconduct and contempt of court which has become very common. It is making it more difficult to render justice in a fair, impartial and fearless manner though the situation is demoralising that something has to be done by all concerned to revamp the image of the Bar. It is not open to wash dirty linen in public and enter in accusation/debates, which tactics are being adopted by unscrupulous elements to influence the judgments and even to deny justice with ulterior motives," the bench said.

The bench said that it is for the Bar Council and the senior members of the Bar to rise to the occasion maintain the independence of the Bar. "It is to make the profession nobler and it is absolutely necessary to remove the black sheeps from the profession to preserve the rich ideals of Bar and on which it struggled for the values of freedom."

Mishra was a part of the bench that dismissed two PILs, that had questioned the role of former CJI Dipak Misra in the medical college admission scam, and sought an independent probe. His bench had earlier dismissed a petition for an investigation into Sahara-Birla diary and the alleged pay-off and also affirmed appointment of KV Chowdary as the CVC.

Updated Date: Jan 30, 2019 17:36:45 IST