LexMR. NAND LAL BALWANI versus NO
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
IN RE: MR. NAND LAL BALWANI A FEBRUARY 26, 1999 (DR. A.S. ANAND, CJ., AND M. SRINIVASAN AND N. SANTOSH HEGDE, JJ.] B .. Contempt of Cowt Act, 1971 : Section 14 Contempt-Advocate-Intemperate behaviour in Court-Shouted slogans in the open Cowt and thereafter hurled shoe towards the Coun-Af- fidavit in defe11ce stating that he /iad bee11 pemxuted by the police age11- c ........ cies-Held, actio11 of Advocate, both by his words and deeds, i11 the presence I of Court amounts to gross oiminal contempt of Court-His action was aimed at inti111idati11g the Cowt and causing inte1fere11ce in judicial proceed- i11gs-Action of Advocate held most reprehe11sible amou11ti11g to gross crimi11al contempt of Cow1-Sente11ce of simple impriso11111ent of four D months and fine of Rs. 2000 imposed-Unqualified apology tendered by • co11tem11or held not bo11a fide and accordingly rejected. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Suo moto contempt. In Re: Mr. Nand Lal Balwani, E S/o. Late Sunder Das, Rio D.9/2, P & T. Colony, Santa Cruz (East) Bombay. Jn-person for the Contemnor for the Respondent. ,. The following Order of the Court was delivered : F This morning while the Court proceedings were going on, Mr. Nand Lal Balwani, who claims to be an Advocate enrolled with the Bombay Bar Association since 1995, and had apparently no case on the Board of this Bench, shouted slogans in the open Court and thereafter hurled his shoe G towards the Court thereby interrupting the Court proceedings. He was , I informed that his action was aimed at intimidating the Court and causing ... interference in conduct of judicial proceedings and amounted to gross contempt of this Court. He was informed of the charge and asked if he had anything to say in his defence. At his request, time was given to him H 937 938 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999) 1 S.C.R. A · to file an affidavit in response to the charge. The affidavit has been filed. Mr. Nand Lal Balwani is present before us and accepts that the charge has been read out to him and he has understood the same. He states that he has filed this affidavit in which he has admitted his in- temperate behaviour in the Court this morning. The contemnor was asked B if he had anything further to say in his defence and he stated that he did not have anything further to say in his defence but that he had filed an interim affidavit and would like to file a detailed affidavit giving details of how he had been persecuted by the police agencies so far. We do not consider it necessary to examine him any further on that aspect since C insofar as the charge of Contempt of Court is concerned, he has nothing further to say. Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 provides that when it appears to the Supreme Court or the High Court upon its own view, that a person has been guilty of contempt committed in its presence or hearing, D the Court may cause such person to be detained in custody, and, at any . time before the rising of the Court, inform him about the charges and afford him an opportunity to make his defence. An order of punishment of discharge can thereafter be made. E The action of the contemnor, both by his words and deeds, in the presence of the Court amounts to gross criminal Contempt of Court. His action was aimed at intimidating the Court and causing interference in judicial proceedings. It is unfortunate and we feel rather concerned that a person belonging to the Bar should have behaved in this manner. Law does not give a lawyer, unsatisfied with the result of any litigation, licence to F permit himself the liberty of causing disrespect to the Court or attempting, in any manner, to lower the dignity of the Courts. A lawyer does not enjoy any special immunity under the Contempt of Courts Act where he is found to have committed a gross Contempt of Court. Courts cannot be. in- timidated to seek favourable orders. The action of the respondent is most G reprehensible and has the tendency to interfere with tne administration of justice and undermine the dignity of the Court and the majesty of law. From the manner in which the contemnor has behaved a deliberate, motivated and calculated attempt to impair the administration of justice is discernible. H From the affidavit, filed by the contemnor, he appears to be ag- I t. IN RE: NAND LAL BAL W ANI 939 .... grieved of alleged suffering at "the hands of all police agencies". This was, A however, no way to ve
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.