Taking serious note of an alleged assault on a lawyer by his opposing counsel inside a Tis Hazari courtroom, the Delhi High Court on Monday sought a report from the Principal District and Sessions Judge and directed police protection for the aggrieved advocate. The court said such incidents corrode the dignity of judicial proceedings.
The Delhi High Court has taken suo motu cognizance of an incident in which a lawyer was allegedly assaulted by his opposing counsel inside a courtroom in Tis Hazari, and directed the Principal District and Sessions Judge to submit a report after making inquiries from all concerned, including the presiding officer.
The matter was heard by a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya, Justice V Kameswar Rao, and Justice Nitin Sambre. The bench was constituted after the Supreme Court, earlier in the day, directed the aggrieved lawyer to approach the high court with his grievance.
During the Supreme Court proceedings, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant had remarked that such incidents amounted to “Gunda Raj”, and could not be tolerated. Following this, the lawyer approached the high court and mentioned the matter before a division bench of Chief Justice Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, which took suo motu cognizance and referred it to the larger bench.
According to the lawyer, he was appearing on behalf of an accused before an additional district judge on February 7 when the opposing counsel, along with several outsiders, attacked him inside the courtroom while the judge was still presiding. The courtroom door was allegedly bolted from inside during the incident.
The high court expressed deep concern, stating that such episodes “not only threaten individual lawyers practicing in the court but also erode the dignity and propriety of the proceedings of the court.”
The bench observed orally:
“The very sight of a lawyer appearing as a contemner erodes the dignity of the institution. So if we are keeping you in such a high esteem… see your conduct. This is, if I am permitted to say, shameful.”
The court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police, who attended the proceedings virtually, to provide round-the-clock security to the aggrieved lawyer and to reassess the threat perception after ten days. The DCP assured the bench that two rival complaints had been received and that the process of registering an FIR had been initiated.
The court instructed police to proceed independently and without influence:
“Please investigate the matter without being pressurized from any corner whatsoever, in an independent manner so we can unearth the truth and act upon it accordingly,” Chief Justice Upadhyaya said.
Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, also chairperson of the Special Committee of the Bar Council of Delhi, said the complaint may be shared with the Bar Council for appropriate action.
The matter will now proceed based on the report submitted by the district judge and the findings of the Delhi Police investigation.
