The appellant who is practicing as an advocate had attacked the integrity of the Sub -Judge by saying that he was a contractor of the Municipal Committee, that he was in collusion with the Dy. Commissioner and he was under his influence while representing the plaintiff in civil suit and an interim stay was not given. The subordinate Judge reported the matter to the District and Session Judge and the latter submitted a report to the high Court.
The High court inquired and in its proceedings, it viewed that the appellant had brought himself clearly within the Ambit of Contempt of Court and he was accordingly found guilty under section 2(c) (i) of the Act. The Appellant tendered an unqualified apology to the Court and begged for all forgiveness. As this is not the first occasion in which proceedings for contempt of Court had been initiated against the Appellant and in that case also he tendered unqualified apology before the High Court. The High Court did not accept the apology tendered by the Appellant and sentenced him for two months imprisonment.
The Supreme Court on appeal held that punishing an advocate for Contempt of Court, no doubt, must be regarded as an extreme measure, but to preserve the dignity of Judiciary, it becomes the duty of the Court to punish the contemner. It was held that the sentence of two months imprisonment is in no way calls for interference. The Court, hence, confirmed the punishment and dismissed his criminal appeal.