Give him back the gown: 4 senior lawyers urge Supreme Court to end Yatin Oza contempt case

The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments on whether Gujarat High Court Advocates' Association (GHCAA) President Yatin Oza should have his Senior Advocate designation permanently restored and his contempt conviction set aside..A Bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar observed that while institutional damage must be considered, the Court would evaluate if Oza's repeated apologies were sufficient to close the 6-year-long case. "When something comes to the institution; the damage is caused. We will see how we perceive it. Going and writing a judgment of 200 pages is no problem. But it should solve the purpose. We will see the video. Let us see what we have to do," the Court said before posting the matter to April 13..The hearing saw three legal heavyweights - Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, AM Singhvi and Arvind Datar - appear for Oza, alongside Senior Advocate KK Venugopal representing the Gujarat High Court Bar Association. All four uniformly argued that Oza had been punished enough and that his apology should be accepted to bring a quietus to the issue..Sibal highlighted the prolonged period Oza has spent without his senior gown."Put a quietus to this. I have been without a gown since 2 years and 5 months. Lordships have seen the video, there’s nothing in it," Sibal submitted.Venugopal argued that the underlying grievances Oza had raised during the pandemic were valid, even if his choice of words was flawed."The issues in the videos are non-issues. He is entitled to say issues of law. These are such small things. His apology is totally sincere. He was the President of the Bar. This should be forgotten," Venugopal submitted.Sibal then stressed that continuing the proceedings despite Oza's repeated apologies was unfair."He has already been punished. Your lordships have to decide whether enough is enough. He has already expressed regret. This is not the way a person who has expressed regret and apologised should be treated, this should not continue," Sibal argued..Singhvi echoed this sentiment, framing the issue as a matter of harmony between the Bar and the Bench. He pointed out that while the High Court had previously refused to accept Oza's apology citing his history of misconduct, the Supreme Court had the power to finally close the chapter."We are all in an ecosystem. It is the Bar and Bench. Therefore, as part of the ecosystem, how long will this issue continue? Today, the punishment is full, he has the right to have the life of a normal lawyer for sometime. You have power to punish him. It’s not that he’s a fool that he will not learn a lesson," Singhvi submitted..Representing the Gujarat High Court, Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria strongly opposed the plea for leniency. He meticulously detailed Oza's history of run-ins with the judiciary, citing incidents from 2006 and 2016 where Oza had made severe allegations against various judges, including writing letters to the Chief Justice of India and the press.Hansaria submitted that in all past instances, Oza had employed a strategy of making explosive allegations, facing contempt charges and then tendering apologies that were routinely accepted. He argued that the High Court's refusal to accept the apology this time was justified to protect the institution's dignity."The High Court has taken a very lenient view towards him and it may not be interfered with. This is about the honour of the institution. Magnanimity should not be compromised with the weakness of the institution," Hansaria submitted..Datar acknowledged that Oza's use of the term "gambling den" was wrong, but urged the Court to view the remarks in the context of the severe distress faced by young lawyers during the COVID-19 pandemic."The whole thing started in a very heated, emotional atmosphere. It can’t be said that the court is a gambling den. He has apologised for it again and again. We had pointed out that the statement must be understood in the context...During COVID time, the Bar was completely incensed. Two young lawyers were working as Swiggy and Zomato delivery. Use of gambling den was wrong. And I have apologised for it," Datar argued.Datar further submitted that the core issue boiled down to just two words uttered in the heat of the moment, for which Oza has been facing consequences for six years."The tongue is a rope by which many hang themselves. Just two words 'gambling den' for which we are fighting for 6 years...I cannot justify calling the institution a gambling den. But something which was said in the heat of the moment…we have apologised again and again," Datar concluded..In June 2020, the Gujarat High Court initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against Oza for making what it termed irresponsible and sensational allegations of corruption against the High Court Registry during a Facebook live press conference. The following month, a Full Court resolution revoked his designation as a Senior Advocate.In October 2020, he was found guilty of contempt and sentenced to a fine of ₹2,000 and simple imprisonment till the rising of the court..Oza challenged both the conviction and the stripping of his gown before the Supreme Court.While the top court temporarily restored his senior designation for a period of two years starting January 1, 2022, the High Court subsequently refused to make the restoration permanent or accept his apology, leading to the current proceedings.