Search Results for "scandalising judiciary"

15 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 15 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Initiates Suo Motu Criminal Contempt Proceedings Against Advocate. Written Material Scandalised the Court, Lowering its Dignity and Interfering with Administration of Justice, Violating Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

This is a suo motu criminal contempt proceeding initiated by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay against Mrs. Vineeta Srinandan. The court took cog...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Convicts Contemnors for Scandalous Allegations Against Judges in Suo Motu Contempt Proceedings. The Court upheld its inherent power under Article 129 to punish for contempt, rejecting procedural objections under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The Supreme Court of India initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against Vijay Kurle, Rashid Khan Pathan, and Nilesh Ojha for sending letters contai...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Shareholders for Alleged Scandalous Allegations in Legal Proceedings. Filing of false cases does not constitute criminal contempt unless it scandalizes the court or impedes administration of justice under Section 2(c) of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The petitioner, Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited (HDFC), filed a contempt petition against respondent shareholders Sureshchandra V. Par...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court on its Own Motion Proceeds Against Individual for Scandalous Facebook Posts Targeting Judges. Court Stresses That Such Vicious Attacks on Judiciary Constitute Gross Criminal Contempt Undermining Rule of Law.

Suo-motu criminal contempt proceedings were initiated by the Bombay High Court against an individual who, through his Facebook profile, published a se...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Convicts Advocate for Criminal Contempt for Disrupting Court Proceedings and Threatening Judge. Advocate's conduct of shouting, snatching notebook, and threatening judge amounts to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The present criminal contempt petition was filed by Ashok Govindrao Bilolikar, the II Adhoc Additional District and Sessions Judge at Parbhani, under ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Criminal Contempt Petition for Non-Compliance with Court Order in Property Dispute. Court holds that willful disobedience of an interim order must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and mere filing of a caveat does not constitute contempt.

The petitioner, Anita Purushottam Hiranandani, filed a criminal contempt petition against her brother-in-law, Respondent No.1 Dwarka Revchand Hiranand...