Arguing in High Pitch Seeks Lawyers in Criminal Contemplation

Arguing in High Pitch Seeks Lawyers in Criminal Contemplation

Delhi Court while hearing a plea for an interim bail for the accused, initiated criminal proceedings against the lawyer itself. The council was arguing for the interim bail of his clients on medical grounds. 

On September 8, Additional Session Judge Shivaji Anand was hearing the arguments of the lawyer regarding the application for interim bail of his client. wherein he touched upon the conduct of the lawyer. There were numerous instances where the lawyer tried to raise his voice and misbehaved in the courtroom. The lawyer even accused the public prosecutor of his mockery while arguing. 

The judge gave several warnings to the lawyer for his misconduct which he didn’t abide by. Hence looking upon the misconduct the judge proceeded with a notice seeking written application from the lawyer explaining the reason for his misconduct and disobeying the courtroom. 

But on September 10, despite being warned by the court that this conduct may amount to offense, the lawyer presented his reluctance not to respond to the application. The judge later initiated the criminal proceedings against him. He quoted, “Ld. Counsel has been advised that his such stand may amount to an offense, yet he has refused to give any written or oral explanation in this regard. Even he does not feel remorseful for his such act. Hence, let miscellaneous numbers be registered for further proceedings u/s 228 IPC & u/s 179 IPC in this regard. Let a copy of this order along with a copy of the previous order dated 08/09/2021 be placed in the said miscellaneous file. The matter will be taken up on 21/09/2021. Let a copy of this order be also sent to the Prosecution.”

The lawyer initially approached the court for the interim bail of his client on medical grounds. It was argued that he was suffering from many ailments and health complications, based on which bail must be granted. The court after analyzing the medical reports rejected the bail on the ground that earlier his bail was rejected on the same ground.