On Monday, the Delhi High Court dismissed a criminal contempt case against a lawyer for displaying disrespect in a courtroom, citing his medical condition. However, the Court directed the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) to evaluate his fitness to practice law [Court on its own motion v Ranjeet Singh Malhotra].
A Bench comprising Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Manoj Jain opted not to take coercive action against the lawyer due to his reported misconduct, taking into account his medical condition.
“Considering the medical condition of the respondent/contemnor, we refrain from taking any coercive action against him for the disrespect shown in court. We discharge him, but caution him that he must maintain decorum whenever appearing before any court,” the Court stated.
However, the Court instructed the BCD to engage with the lawyer and determine whether he is capable of continuing his legal practice.
“We direct the Registry to communicate this order to the Bar Council of Delhi, who shall summon the respondent/contemnor to evaluate his fitness to continue in this profession,” the order dated May 20 read.
The Court addressed a contempt reference from 2021 initiated by Additional District Judge Hem Raj of the Tis Hazari Courts in Delhi.
According to the reference, the lawyer was reportedly engaged in loud conversation with a colleague during a court hearing. Despite being instructed to lower his voice, he allegedly persisted in disruptive behavior.
Over the following two years, the judge lodged several complaints against the lawyer for repeated misconduct.
Last October, the High Court requested the lawyer’s personal appearance. However, in January, his counsel informed the Court of his illness and requested an adjournment. The same occurred on March 7, prompting the Court to issue bailable warrants against him.
Finally, on May 20, the lawyer appeared before the High Court and presented various prescriptions indicating treatment for behavioral issues.
The Court observed that the manner in which the lawyer presented his case confirmed his acute behavioral issues.
“The manner in which he presented his case today before us confirms that he is suffering from acute behavioral issues and appears to become frustrated and annoyed for reasons known only to him. Additionally, he reportedly has very poor vision and is unable to read and write. He seems unaware of what to say and how to say it,” the Court remarked while disposing of the contempt case.
Senior Advocate N Hariharan served as the Amicus Curiae, assisted by advocates Punya Rekha and Mueed Shah.
