In a criminal appeal, advocate Virendra Singh had publicly accused judges from both the High Court and trial court of arbitrary conduct. Despite being given an opportunity to apologize, he chose not to do so. The Delhi High Court has convicted an advocate of criminal contempt of court, sentencing him to six months of simple imprisonment for making disparaging remarks about the judges of the High Court and the district judiciary.
A division bench consisting of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Shalinder Kaur noted that when presented with the chance to offer an unambiguous apology, the defendant, Virendra Singh, declined and stood by the allegations he had made. The court viewed this as a lack of remorse for his actions.
“After reviewing the evidence and the arguments put forth by the defendant, this Court has determined that the defendant does not express regret for his behavior and actions. Therefore, we hereby sentence him to six months of simple imprisonment, in addition to a fine of ₹2,000/-. Failure to pay the fine will result in an additional seven days of simple imprisonment. The Court directed SI Prem (Naib Court) to apprehend the defendant and, in coordination with the SHO of Police Station Tilak Marg, transfer custody of the accused to the Superintendent of Tihar Jail, Delhi. Singh was allowed to return home briefly to change into clean clothes, retrieve his medications from the High Court parking, and return his vehicle before being taken to the correctional facility.
On July 14, 2022, a criminal appeal filed by Singh was scheduled for a hearing before a single judge. The appeal contained a series of allegations against various judges, accusing them of acting arbitrarily, capriciously, or with bias. The judges were also named in the petition.
The presiding judge inquired whether the advocate intended to retract the allegations, to which Singh responded negatively, stating that they were factual statements and not derogatory accusations. Furthermore, the presiding judge noted that the accusations were not initiated by the victim who was the appellant but were made on the counsel’s (Virendra Singh) recommendation.
As a result, the presiding judge issued a contempt notice to Singh and directed that the case be placed before the Division Bench responsible for handling contempt matters, pending instructions from the Chief Justice.
The Division Bench engaged in extensive deliberations with Singh and rejected his argument that the allegations were included to provide “the complete context necessary to establish the victim’s injustice that resulted in the accused’s acquittal.”
“Based on the foregoing, it is evident that the defendant/respondent has made unfounded and scandalous allegations in the appeal, directing unwarranted and baseless insinuations at the learned Judges of this Court and the District Courts in the discharge of their judicial duties. Moreover, as an officer of this court, such allegations in judicial pleadings carry a more serious weight. Constitutional courts have a responsibility to vigilantly monitor such actions, failing which they will result in adverse consequences,” the court ruled.
Consequently, Singh was sentenced to six months of imprisonment.
