The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its judgment on an appeal filed by Yatin Oza, President of the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Association (GHCAA), challenging a High Court order that convicted and sentenced him for making scandalous remarks against the state judiciary.
A bench comprising Justices J K Maheshwari and A S Chandurkar concluded the hearing after listening to extensive arguments from a battery of senior advocates representing Oza, including K K Venugopal, Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Singhvi, and Arvind Datar. The Gujarat High Court was represented by senior lawyer Vijay Hansaria.
The case centers on an October 6, 2020, verdict by the Gujarat High Court, which found Oza guilty of contempt of court. The High Court had sentenced him “till the rising of the court” and imposed a fine of ₹2,000. Failure to pay the fine would result in two months of simple imprisonment. While the High Court initially suspended the execution of this sentence for 60 days, the Supreme Court subsequently extended that suspension while seized of his appeal.
The friction between Oza and the judiciary is long-standing. In 2020, Oza was stripped of his “Senior Advocate” designation after he referred to the Gujarat High Court as a “gamblers’ den” during a press conference.
In a significant turn in October 2021, the Supreme Court exercised its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to restore Oza’s senior gown for a two-year probationary period starting January 1, 2022. At the time, the apex court described this as his “one more and last chance.”
The path to restoration hit a major roadblock in April 2024. The Full Court of the Gujarat High Court resolved to recall the restoration of Oza’s Senior Advocate designation following what has been described as a “sixth incident” of misconduct.
Documents reveal that on April 9, 2024, during a writ petition hearing, Oza allegedly accused the presiding judge of “forum shopping.” The Full Court, after reviewing video footage, noted that Oza appeared for a respondent without a briefing counsel or a formal power of appearance.
In its April 15, 2024, resolution, the Full Court stated Oza’s behavior was “unbecoming of a senior advocate” and suggested his remarks were intended to “browbeat the court.”
During Tuesday’s proceedings, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal urged the bench to bring a “quietus” to the long-running saga. He highlighted that Oza has tendered unconditional apologies on multiple occasions.
“I have been without my (senior) gown for two years and five months. Lordships have seen the video; there is nothing in it. He has already been punished,” Sibal argued. “Your lordships have to decide whether enough is enough.”
Supporting this stance, Dr. Abhishek Singhvi emphasized the need for closure. “Today, the punishment is full; he has the right to have the life of a normal lawyer for some time. You have the power to punish him. It is not that he is a fool that he will not learn a lesson. It is time for a quietus,” Singhvi told the bench.
Representing the Gujarat High Court, Vijay Hansaria maintained that the core of the issue is the “integrity of the judiciary as an institution,” justifying the actions taken against the veteran lawyer.
Oza, who was elected as the GHCAA president for the 19th time on December 20, 2025, now awaits the top court’s final determination on whether his conviction will stand or if the “last chance” granted in 2021 will be further extended or modified.
