The Supreme Court on Monday granted interim protection to the President of the Gauhati High Court Bar Association, K.N. Choudhary, staying the contempt proceedings initiated against him by the Gauhati High Court.
The contempt proceedings stemmed from allegations that two senior lawyers, Anil Kumar Bhattacharyya and Pallavi Talukdar, had made scandalous remarks against an individual Judge and the High Court during protests against the proposed shifting of the High Court building to Rangmahal in North Guwahati. The complaint had been filed by the Advocate General of Assam.
A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ordered that while the High Court may proceed with contempt proceedings against Bhattacharyya and Talukdar, the proceedings against Choudhary would remain in abeyance. “Issue notice… Considering the facts and circumstances and the arguments advanced, as an interim measure we provide that the High Court will proceed with the contempt proceedings against Respondent 1 and 3. However, proceedings against the present petitioner [President of Bar] shall remain in abeyance,” the Court stated.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Choudhary, argued that the Bar President was not even present when the remarks were made. He submitted a statement along with a video clip before the High Court in support of his position.
During the hearing, Justice Vikram Nath asked why there was opposition to the construction of the new High Court building. While Sibal initially denied opposing it, he later conceded that he may have opposed the move but contended that mere opposition could not amount to contempt. Sibal further clarified that no strike had taken place over the relocation issue.
Meanwhile, a separate petition filed by the Bar Association through Senior Advocate Shyam Divan was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court declined to entertain the association’s petition but granted interim relief to Choudhary.
“What we propose to do Mr. Sibal is, we are not inclined to entertain the petition on behalf of the Bar Association. Dismissed. And so far as the President is concerned, will issue notice and we will permit the High Court to continue contempt as against the two lawyers,” observed Justice Nath.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Advocate General of Assam, opposed the interim protection, arguing that the President could not dissociate himself from the actions of the Bar members. He submitted that the Bar President holds responsibility for the conduct of the association’s members and thus should not be treated separately. However, Justice Nath observed that the Bar Association would be represented through its Secretary, not necessarily the President.
The underlying controversy arose after Advocate Pallavi Talukdar, in a media interview, allegedly made derogatory remarks against Justice Suman Shyam, a sitting Judge of the Gauhati High Court and Chairman of the Court’s Building Committee and Information and Communication Technology Committee. Advocate Bhattacharyya allegedly claimed in an interview that he had “positive evidence” suggesting the Judge behaved “like a CID.”
The High Court had earlier issued a press release on April 3 expressing concern over the protests. The release stated:
“Misinformation being spread in the Public arena on the subject of shifting of the Gauhati High Court from the present location and scandalous aspersions being leveled against the constitutional functionaries attached to the Gauhati High Court by a section of the members of the Gauhati High Court Bar Association, which have the effect of lowering the Public faith in the Institution of Judiciary as a whole and create doubts in the mind of the public as regards the independence of the Judiciary have necessitated the issuance of the present.”
The Gauhati High Court has reserved judgment on the contempt petitions against Bhattacharyya and Talukdar.
