|CORAM:||R. P. Tolani (JM), T. R. Meena (AM)|
|CATCH WORDS:||contempt of court, strictures|
|COUNSEL:||K C Moondra|
|DATE:||May 27, 2015 (Date of pronouncement)|
|DATE:||May 28, 2015 (Date of publication)|
|FILE:||Click here to view full post with file download link|
|The severity of accusations and fury emerging from their language is highly derogatory, defamatory and contemptuous, sent with a scheme and clear intention to intimidate judicial officers to desist from passing an unfavorable order|
It shall be noteworthy that till 28-4-15 these professionals had no objection with the bench as no grievance whatsoever was raised. The casual way of adjournment against final chance shows their casual attitude of taking the judicial process for granted. The emphatic demand that – if other matters were adjourned, our appeal should also have been adjourned; amounts to dictating the terms to the court. It reflects their inaptitude in failing to appreciate the vital fact that thus adjournment was granted as a final chance which was agreed by them. “They keep ‘holier than thou attitude’; if I commit wrong or disobey there is nothing wrong in it but if the bench doesn’t conduct itself in my desired way then bench is by default wrong and I raise scandalous tirade against bench.” To show their might they shoot frivolous complaints, file litany of motivated RTIs proclaiming to be RTI activist. These brazenly scandalous acts have been unleashed by them with swagger of impunity and recklessness without realizing that when the appeal is pending orders such threats construe contempt of court. …..
Perhaps they are enraged on their own professional inaptitude which became visible in open court proceedings, it requires self introspection and hard preparation of appeal; instead they have misdirected their self fury on the bench indiscriminately. Their own professional infirmities can be improved from their side by mending their unprofessional attitude. They cannot score brownie points by telling the world that they can get desired orders by threatening to harm judicial officers and their delinquent conduct is justified.