Case Note & Summary
This contempt petition was filed by the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, a statutory body under the Advocates Act, 1961, alleging criminal contempt against two police officers attached to Bhoiwada police station, Mumbai. The incident occurred on 20 January 2003, when advocate Harish Bhatia visited the police station to assist his client Rajkumar Pahuja, who had been summoned. It was alleged that Police Inspector Arun Khanvilkar and PSI Satish Jadhav, without provocation, pushed, slapped, and wrongfully confined the advocate, and removed his mobile phone and bag, before releasing him around 4.30 p.m. The Bar Council contended that an advocate is an officer of the court and any such mistreatment while discharging professional duties interferes with the administration of justice and constitutes criminal contempt under Section 2(c)(iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Consent of the Advocate General was obtained under Section 15 of the Act. The petitioner sought punishment of the respondents. The respondent police officers denied the allegations, claiming the advocate had used abusive language and obstructed police work, and filed an additional affidavit tendering unconditional apology. The High Court had earlier directed that the contempt petition be heard after the conclusion of related criminal proceedings between the parties, but subsequently listed the matter for hearing. Arguments were advanced by counsel for the petitioner emphasizing the role of an advocate as an officer of the court and the scope of criminal contempt. The judgment remains incomplete in the provided text, without a final decision on the contempt allegation.
Issue of Consideration
Whether misbehavior with an advocate, including assault and wrongful confinement, by police officers while the advocate is rendering legal assistance at a police station amounts to criminal contempt of court under Section 2(c)(iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (08) 68
Contempt Petition No.17 of 2003
Naresh H Patil, K U Chandiwala
C.M.Kothari for petitioner; Nitin Pradhan i/b Ms.S.D.Khot for respondent nos.2 and 3; J.P.Yagnik a/w P.S.Hingorani APP for State
Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa
State of Maharashtra, Shri Arun Khanvilkar, Shri Satish Bhagwan Jadhav
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal contempt petition alleging interference with administration of justice by police officers against an advocate.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought punishment of respondent police officers under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for criminal contempt.
Filing Reason
Incident on 20 January 2003 where police officers allegedly assaulted and wrongfully confined advocate Harish Bhatia at Bhoiwada police station when he went to render legal assistance to a client.
Previous Decisions
The High Court had earlier directed that the contempt petition be heard after conclusion of criminal proceedings between the parties, but later listed it for hearing.
Issues
Whether the alleged acts of police officers in assaulting and wrongfully confining an advocate while he was discharging professional duties at a police station amount to criminal contempt of court under Section 2(c)(iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that an advocate is an officer of the court and any disrespect, threat, or assault on him while discharging professional duties constitutes criminal contempt under Section 2(c)(iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Respondent contended that advocate Harish Bhatia behaved rudely, used abusive language, and obstructed police work, and that no contempt was committed.
Respondent no.2 filed additional affidavit tendering unconditional apology and requested postponement of hearing till criminal cases are decided.
Judgment Excerpts
RESOLVED that the Bar Council condemns the atrocity committed on lawyer Mr.Bhatia by the Mr.P.I.Khanvilkar, Police Inspector and other officers of Bhoiwada police station. This Association takes a serious note of the said matter and expresses its opinion that it is the dignity of the legal fraternity which is undermined. It also amounts to intereference in the legal profession.
an advocate is officer of the court who is part and parcel of administration of justice. Any disrespect or disregard of an advocate (by threatening or abusing him etc.) while discharging his professional duty amounts to contempt of court.
even if an advocate is engaged in act of providing legal assistance, advice to his client in police station in presence of a police officer he would be discharging his duty as an officer of the court and misbehaviour with officer of the court by any person including police officer would amount to committing criminal contempt of court.
Procedural History
Contempt petition filed on 10 July 2003. By order dated 17 December 2003, rule was granted in related criminal writ petition and contempt petition admitted; parties given liberty to list after trial court proceedings. By order dated 11 April 2005, contempt petition directed to be posted after conclusion of criminal cases. On 14 July 2004, liberty granted to withdraw criminal writ petition. By order dated 23 June 2011, contempt petition directed to be listed for hearing on 30 June 2011. Matter heard on 11 August 2011.
Acts & Sections
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: 2(c)(iii), 15
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 323, 342, 504, 353, 341
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 97, 313
