In a scathing ruling, the Gujarat High Court has dismissed a petition filed by suspended Additional District Judge G R Soni, who sought to halt disciplinary proceedings against him for a wide array of alleged misconduct. The court did not stop at dismissing the plea; it further directed that criminal contempt proceedings be considered against Soni after he alleged that a senior judge of the High Court exercised “control” over junior colleagues.
The Division Bench, comprising Justices N S Sanjay Gowda and J L Odedra, delivered the judgment on May 8, asserting that Soni’s written submissions were a clear attempt to “scandalise the court” and “lower the authority of the court.”
The disciplinary proceedings against Soni, which began with his suspension in December 2024, involve a chargesheet containing six major allegations. According to the court records, the charges include:
- Professional Misconduct: Developing “intimate relations” with an outsourced clerk and providing her with financial assistance.
- Abuse of Power: Utilizing court employees to help set up and manage a private business venture for the clerk.
- Obstruction: Deliberately blocking CCTV cameras to prevent the recording of court activities.
- Neglect of Duty: Failing to maintain regular court hours, using a mobile phone, and engaging in prayers while presiding over the bench.
- Intimidation: Threatening peons to coerce them into withdrawing statements they had made to the Industrial Court in Ahmedabad.
Soni’s legal team, led by Senior Advocate Percy Kavina, argued that the entire inquiry was “vitiated” because it was not initiated by a formal written complaint accompanied by an affidavit. They cited Ministry of Law and Justice guidelines and argued that the charges were too vague to stand.
However, the High Court rejected this defense entirely. Representing the High Court, Senior Advocate Gautam Joshi argued that Soni was making every effort to “thwart the inquiry” and prevent the truth from coming to light. Joshi clarified that the investigation was triggered not by a disgruntled litigant, but by the High Court’s own internal information regarding “improper conduct.”
The bench sided with the High Court’s administration, ruling that the power to discipline judicial officers is “independent and absolute.” Interpreting the Gujarat Civil Services Rules, the court clarified that the High Court does not require a formal complaint to act; it only needs to form an opinion that there are “good and sufficient grounds” to investigate.
The case took a more serious turn following Soni’s independent written submissions filed after the judgment had been reserved. In those documents, Soni alleged that a specific senior judge of the Gujarat High Court had “good control over all branches” and was “capable to instruct/direct to his junior judge.”
The Division Bench took strong exception to these claims, stating that such assertions interfere with judicial proceedings and obstruct the administration of justice.
“These assertions clearly constitute a criminal contempt,” the bench observed.
While dismissing the writ petition, the court ordered that the matter be placed before the appropriate bench to initiate formal contempt proceedings. G R Soni has been directed to appear personally before the contempt bench on June 15.
