High CourtsDivision Bench

In Re : Awadh Narain Yadav

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 15 November 2008 · Citation: (2009) 1 ACR 238

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.K. Verma, J · B.A. Zaidi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — Section 12
CASE NUMBER
C. P. No. 2 of 2008
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 475 words
1.

It is being increasingly observed that lawyers are misbehaving with Presiding Officers in District Courts. The malice is getting deeper because no effective steps are being taken to stop the same.

2.

We have an example of the same here before us.

3.

The contemner advocate Awadh Narain Yadav, shouted, thundered and thumbed the Presiding Officer (Sri Sita Ram Nigam) in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah and declared that he will not allow him to work.

4.

The Hon''ble Administrative Judge called for the report of the lawyer concerned, who is said to have taken to the profession after he was dismissed, as a police constable. The report submitted to him, translated into English, was as hereunder:

The general reputation of Sri Awadh Narain Yadav, is not good. In order to coerce into submission, the Presiding Officers, he threatens and quarrels with them and makes false complaints against them. He is part of a noisy group of advocates. He is a member of District Bar Association. On enquiry in this regard, from the Bar Association, the Secretary of the Bar has informed in writing that Sri Awadh Narain Yadav, advocate is a dismissed Sepoy from U. P. Police. He is temperamentally aggressive and subscribes to groupism and casteism. His behaviour in the Court is insulting and his conduct leaves much to be desired. He has nominal work and seldom appears in the Courts. Bar Association has also intimated that he tries to subjugate and terrorise other members of the Bar.

5.

That is how the advocate is before us facing a charge of contempt of court. His counsel Sri G. P. Dixit has pleaded the mercy and the advocate concerned has tendered an unconditional apology. After giving due consideration to the matter, we are inclined to accept the apology but the same has to be hemmed in by placement of appropriate conditions:

(i) The contemner advocate shall file a written unconditional apology for his behaviour before Presiding Officer in the Court concerned, within a week from today.

(ii) A copy of the unconditional apology will be sent to the Bar Association, Etawah and the President shall get it pasted on the Bar Association Notice Board. The contemner advocate shall not obstruct this process.

(iii) In case he is found misbehaving with any Court again and a complaint is made against him and he is again found guilty having committed contempt of court, he will be rendered liable for imprisonment.

(iv) In case of non-compliance of the aforesaid condition Nos. (i) and (ii), he shall stand convicted u/s 12(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and he shall stand sentenced to six months simple imprisonment.

6.

A copy of this order be sent to District Judge, Etawah, who shall send a compliance report within twenty days for further orders, if any.