Jharkhand High Court registers contempt case after viral video shows lawyer in heated exchange with judge

The Jharkhand High Court on Friday registered a suo motu criminal contempt case against advocate Mahesh Tiwari a day after he had an acrimonious exchange of words with Justice Rajesh Kumar in open court.

A video of the hearing streamed live on YouTube went viral on the social media. Advocate Tiwari, while addressing Justice Kumar, said on October 16,

"I can argue in my own way, not in your way in which you say. Please mind that... Don't try to humiliate any advocate, I am telling you. Sir, please don't try to humiliate any person. The country is burning... with the judiciary. These are my words. Don't try to humiliate any advocate. Aap bahut jaante hai, aap judge hogaye; hum loug nai jaante hum loug wakeel hai (you know a lot, you have become a judge; We don't know, we are lawyers). I will argue in my own way. Don't cross the limit. Please, don't cross the limit. I have already practiced for the last 40 years."

A day later, a full bench of Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad, Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay, Justice Ananda Sen and Justice Rajesh Shankar took up a criminal contempt case titled 'Court on Its own Motion vs Mahesh Tiwari'.

A copy of the order passed in the case today was not immediately available. The matter is listed for hearing next on November 11.

The alleged contempt before the single-bench of Justice Kumar occurred on Thursday just minutes after the Court had a heard a woman's case against disconnection of her electricity connection and a demand of an amount of over ₹1.30 Lakh by the electricity board .

The petitioner Pushpa Kumari, a widow, was represented by advocate Tiwari. Following a brief hearing, the Court passed an order directing restoration of her connection, subject to deposit of ₹50,000.

Earlier, after Tiwari had urged that she may be allowed to deposit only ₹10,000-15,000 for restoration of electricity considering her plight and the upcoming Diwali, Justice Kumar said,

"Nai, utna mai nai. Utna plight wlight nai. Hum nyay karne nai bhethe hai [No. not that less an amount...]. I have to go in accordance with law. Justice has to be done in accordance with law. I am not a court of justice. I am a court of law. There is alternate remedy and so many things. I can give indulgence only on a deposit of appropriate amount."

During submissions related to bill amount, advocate Tiwari said that maximum ₹15,000 should have been the demand as the monthly bill was less than ₹200. However, the board was demanding ₹350-₹450, he added.

Surprised at the amount of mentioned by the lawyer, Justice Kumar said an inquiry can be ordered into the matter.

"Khopdi khali karke nai bhethe haina Tiwari ji. Tiwari ji, khopdi khali karke nai bhethe hai, khopdi mai hai kuch... [Mr Tiwari, I am not sitting here with an empty skull. My skull has something in it]," the judge added, while touching his head.

Continuing his submissions, Advocate Tiwari sought intervention on humanitarian grounds and agreed to deposit a certain but lesser amount. However, the Court pointed to lack of pleadings related to the amount and thus reiterated that 50 percent of the demand has to be deposited first.

"I cannot pass any order in the hawa (air)... hawa mai nai kardenge. There has to be some basis. Aap basis nai de rahe hai. 50% is declared basis by precedent. We will follow," it added.

Tiwari responded that ₹30,000 was being demanded in excess and the Court may order deposit of a half of ₹1 lakh.

"₹50,000 we will manage from somewhere," he added. At this, the Court said,

"Manage? Ab aap aisa baat mat boliye. This is not the court of mercy. I am not court of mercy".

Tiwari then agreed that the petitioner will deposit ₹50,000. The Court, accordingly, ordered restoration of the electricty, subject to payment of the amount.

Though the hearing appeared to have culminated normally, except the candids remarks of the judge, tempers flared later when the Court was hearing a different lawyer in another case of eviction.

The judge made certain remarks while addressing this second lawyer but it seemed obvious that he was referring to the previous case and the remarks were aimed at Tiwari.

"Aap khada hoke ki 'widow hai, ye hai wo hai, gareeb hai... koi pleading nai hai... agar hum nai stay denge, tou hum anyay kardenge. [You cannot get up and merely plead that 'she is a widow, a destitute ...' that too in absence of pleadings and say if we don't grant stay, injustice will be done by Court] What sort of argument is going on," the Court said.

At this stage, the Court appeared to shift its attention to the State Bar Council Chairman.

"This is the way your advocate will argue the case?" Justice Kumar said.

On hearing the judge, Tiwari, who was still present in the courtroom, came towards the front and pointedly asked the judge whether he was referring to him. Justice Kumar answered in affirmative.

Tiwari then told the Court that he will argue in his own way. The judge responded that the lawyer cannot say that the Court was doing injustice. Tiwari said he had not said so.

Other lawyers then stood up to diffuse the situation. The streaming of the hearing was stopped shortly afterwards.

The video of the episode later went viral on social media.