Gauhati HC Issues Contempt Notice to Bar President for Inaction against the Lawyers Who Passed Derogatory Remarks Against Judge

The Gauhati High Court Bench of Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice N Unni Krishnan Nairhas issued criminal contempt notices to Kamal Nayan Choudhury, President of the Gauhati High Court Bar Association, for failing to act against two advocates who made derogatory and scandalous remarks against a sitting judge during a Bar Association protest on 24 March 2025. The Court found prima facie material to proceed against him for inaction and failure to uphold the dignity of the judiciary during an event organized under his leadership.

Case Background:

The contempt proceedings were initiated by the Advocate General of Assam under Sections 2(c), 11, 12, and 15(1)(a) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Article 215 of the Constitution. The matter arose from video footage broadcast on Prag News and circulated on social media, capturing a sit-in protest organized by the Bar Association, during which two advocates made remarks against Justice Suman Shyam of the Gauhati High Court.

The Advocate General alleged that the remarks made by Senior Advocate Anil Kumar Bhattacharyya and Advocate Pallabi Talukdar were scandalous and intended to lower the authority of the Court. The Bar Association President was made a party for his failure to prevent or act against such conduct during the protest held under the Association’s banner.

Allegations Against the Bar President:

• The Court noted that while Mr. Choudhury did not personally make any contemptuous statements, he was present at the protest and made no attempt to restrain the advocates.
  
• The Court observed:
  
  
  “It was the responsibility of the Bar Association to check that any Member of the Association should not use the platform… to scandalize the Courts.”
  
  
• The Association did not issue any condemnation of the remarks and only issued a show cause notice to one of the two advocates, which the Court found insufficient.
  
• The Court rejected the defense that the President could not be held liable due to the absence of vicarious liability, stating that moral responsibility remains:
  
  
  “Disregard to their moral responsibility… cannot be shrugged off simply by distancing themselves from the derogatory remarks made by its Members.”
  
  

Court’s Observations:

• The Court emphasized that contempt jurisdiction is to be exercised cautiously, but is warranted when acts “tend to shake public confidence in the judicial institutions.”
  
• The remarks made during the protest were found to be not only derogatory but contemptuous, with intent to scandalize the Court and undermine public trust.
  
• The Bench noted that:
  
  
  “Millions of people have immense faith in the judiciary… The tendency to ignore contemptuous conduct may result in erosion of that faith.”
  
  
• The Court expressed concern over increasing criticism of the judiciary by members of the legal profession and stated that steps must be taken to curb such conduct.
  

Court’s Directions:

1. Cognizance taken of criminal contempt against all three respondents.
   
2. Notice issued under Section 17 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to:
   
   • Anil Kumar Bhattacharyya
     
   • Pallabi Talukdar
     
   • Kamal Nayan Choudhury (Bar Association President)
     
3. The matter has been listed for 13 May 2025.
   
4. The Court also directed YouTube and Prag News to remove the relevant video content from their platforms.
   
5. The Union of India and State of Assam were directed to ensure compliance with the takedown order.
   

Status: Notices issued; next hearing on 13 May 2025.