- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
The Supreme Court today allowed President of the Gujarat High Court Advocates' Association (GHCAA) Yatin Oza to withdraw his plea challenging the suo motu criminal contempt notice issued by the Gujarat High Court against him.
Appearing for Oza today, Senior Advocate AM Singhvi submitted that his client does not want to impede the functioning of justice.
However, the submission drew a sharp response from the Court, which queried,
"Are you doing a favour on us by letting it function?"
Singhvi further submitted that the High Court order was passed in anger, prompting Chief Justice of India SA Bobde to respond.
CJI Bobde noted that the allegation against Oza was that he is malignining the concept of justice and not any judge or court.
"You reply to the High Court", CJI Bobde said.
Singhvi proceeded to urge the Court for permission to withdraw the petition, to which request the Court acceded. Accordingly, the plea was dismissed as withdrawn.
Senior Advocate Arvind Datar also appeared for Oza.
The three-judge Bench of CJI SA Bobde and Justices AS Bopanna and MR Shah was hearing Oza's plea against the suo motu order passed against him for irresponsible, sensational and intemperate allegations of corruption levelled against the High Court and its Registry. The remarks were made during a live press conference via Facebook.
The petition by Oza filed through Advocate Purvish Jitendra Malkan stated that the Gujarat High Court had “committed grave error in taking cognizance and issuing a notice without adherence to Rule 11 of the Contempt of Courts (Gujarat High Court) Rules, 1984 which requires that court can only record reason and then refer it to the Hon’ble Chief Justice for it being placed before the Bench having the said Roster.”
On June 10, the High Court Bench of Justices Sonia Gokani and NV Anjaria stated that Oza had made the following, among other, accusations against the High Court and its Registry:
Corrupt practices are being adopted by the Registry of the High Court of Gujarat;
Undue favour is shown to high-profile industrialists and smugglers and traitors;
The High Court functioning is for influential and rich people and their advocates;
The billionaires walk away with orders from the High Court in two days whereas the poor and non-VIPs need to suffer;
If the litigants want to file any matter in the High Court, person has to be either Mr Khambhata or the builder or the company. This also was circulated in Gujarati daily Sandesh titled as ‘Gujarat High Court has become a gambling den - Yatin Oza’.
The Gujarat High Court had proceeded to opine that Oza had behaved in the most reckless manner in levelling false and contemptuous allegations of corruption, malpractices against the administration of the High Court.
The plea challenging this order stated that the ramification of the Gujarat High Court order is that it will “ultimately damage not only the reputation the career and the standing of the petitioner but also destroy the very concept of freedom of speech guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 19 (1)(g) of the Constitution of India.”