The Court disposed of a contempt petition filed on its own motion against Advocate Shakil Akhtar for disruptive conduct and disrespectful behavior during proceedings in another matter involving a Single Judge.
The contempt petition disposed of; petitioner warned of severe consequences for any future lapse.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~1
COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr.Advocate, Mr. Narender Mann, Amicus Curiae, Ms. Aakashi Lodha, Mr. Sanjeevi Seshadri, Advocates
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
“1. Mr Shakil Akhtar, Advocate - who appeared for the petitioner today in W.P.(C) 8983/2017 captioned Shiv Shankar Gupta vs Government of NCT of Delhi - was heard and the said petition was dismissed with costs. His conduct at the time of dictation of order was highly objectionable and he made statement to the effect that he was not getting favourable orders as the other side was an MLA.
Cont Cas (Crl) 5/2017 Page 1 of 3
jail for six months. His attitude was aggressive and he continued to disturb the proceedings.
Cont Cas (Crl) 5/2017 Page 2 of 3
expected from a member of the Bar while addressing the Court. In the present case, this Court is particularly concerned about the manner in which the learned Single Judge was addressed by Mr. Akhtar. Interruption of the proceedings and seeking to cast aspersions on the fairness of the Court, whatever the provocation might have been, was wholly unwarranted and inexcusable.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
I.S. MEHTA, J.
FEBRUARY 07, 2018/mw
Cont Cas (Crl) 5/2017 Page 3 of 3
High Court of Delhi
Shakil Akhtar
S. Muralidhar
I.S. Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
