SC seeks response of bar leader on plea of ex-district judge in contempt case
New Delhi, Aug 9 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Friday sought a response from bar leader Rajiv Khosla on a plea of former Delhi district court judge Sujata Kohli challenging his exoneration by the Delhi High Court in a contempt case for allegedly interfering with the administration of justice.
The high court had in February discharged Khosla, a former president of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA), in the contempt case which was initiated against him for allegedly obstructing the court proceedings against him.
Chaos had erupted in a courtroom in Delhi’s Tis Hazari court on November 30, 2021, with lawyers chanting slogans and standing atop tables and chairs as they awaited the pronouncement of an order on sentencing against Khosla in the assault case lodged by Kohli.
Kohli had alleged that Khosla grabbed her by hair and dragged her in August 1994. She was a lawyer at Tis Hazari court at the time of the incident and later went on to become a judge in the Delhi judiciary. She retired as a District and Sessions Judge in 2020.
The contempt case against the bar leader had arisen on account of the alleged chaos and obstruction caused by the lawyers supporting him when the trial court was about to pronounce the sentence against him.
Amid chanting of slogans by the lawyers, the trial court had convicted Khosla and directed him to pay a total compensation of Rs 40,000 to the State and Kohli.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra took note of the submissions of senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for Kohli, assailing the high court verdict exonerating him.
Besides issuing notice to Khosla, the bench asked the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court to supply in sealed cover the report of the then district judge about the incident of November 30, 2021.
The matter will be taken up after three weeks.
“She was a practising lawyer, when this gentleman pulled her hair in court premises, thereafter she became a judicial officer,” Jaising said, adding that on the judgement day, a “mob” of lawyers attempted to prevent the judge from performing the duties.
“The grievance is really against the leader of the Bar. He went on to become the President of DHCBA…This is happening very often…even other judges had to come to the courtroom to pacify protesting lawyers,” she said.
The high court, in its order, had said that the former judge did not produce any material to compel it to form an opinion that Khosla committed any criminal contempt.
It had said the CCTV footage of the incident showed that the courtroom was “fully packed” on the day of arguments on sentencing, quite possibly because the convict was an office bearer of the Delhi Bar Association as well as the DHCBA, and the “voice of the alleged contemnor was not properly audible”.
It had said the transcript of the footage too did not reflect utterances attributable to Khosla that could suggest contempt.
“There is nothing before us which may indicate that the contemnor had scandalized or lowered the authority of any Court or interfered or tried to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceedings,” the high court had concluded while discharging him.
On October 29, 2021, a trial court had convicted Rajiv Khosla in the assault case for offences punishable under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the India Penal Code (IPC).
In her petition before the high court, Kohli had alleged that after his conviction, Khosla made an “appeal to the Bar bodies to join him” and they sided with him while deciding to go on a strike.
She had added that Khosla’s conduct inside the courtroom was also objectionable.