Have never seen lawyer sending notice to judge: TS CJ while hearing contempt proceedings
A division bench of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji heard the contempt proceedings against advocate B. Balamukunda Rao on Friday.
By Newsmeter Network Published on 4 Feb 2023 4:08 AM GMT
Contempt proceedings: TS HC asks lawyer to apologize or face action for sending notice to judge Telangana High Court has initiated Suo Motu contempt proceedings against an advocate for issuing a notice to a sitting judge.
A division bench of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji heard the contempt proceedings against advocate B. Balamukunda Rao on Friday. B. Balamukunda Rao had sent a notice to Telananga HIGH Court judge Justice P. Madhavi Devi and asked her to reply within one week. He had threatened appropriate steps holding the judge personally liable "for the cost and consequences arising thereof.”
It happened when Justice P. Madhavi Devi was hearing a case. B. Balamukunda Rao interpreted the court several times. He cited judgments of the High Court and Supreme Court, but the judge refused to go through them. Later B. Balamukunda Rao alleged that the judge disrespected him and asked unwarranted questions. He said the act falls under the Contempt of Cours Act punishable under section 11 and 12.
Hearing the case, Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said they do not know what transpired in the Court. “Everyone must conduct proceedings in proper decorum. It cannot be a free for all in the court,” he said.
Furious over the notice to the Judge, CJ Bhuyan said prima facie they will prevent him from practicing. He said that they will not hesitate to pass the order. Advocate General Banda Shivananda Prasad informed the Court that Balamukunda Rao did not withdraw the notice.
CJ Bhuyan said that before he became the Chief Justice, he has been a judge in 7 to 8 High Courts. “I never saw a lawyer issuing notice to Judge and asking her to reply within 7 days. What is more serious is asking her to respond or else action will be taken,” he said.
The division bench observed that B. Balamukunda Rao tried to justify his non-acceptable conduct by contending that the Judge didn't consider various Judgments submitted by him. “This cannot be a ground for unruly behavior inside the Court,” the bench said.
The court granted him some time to ponder over his conduct. “If he feels conduct was bad, may file an affidavit seeking an apology,” he said. The matter has been posted to February 17.
