Supreme Court issues bailable warrant against lawyer for ‘scandalous’ complaint against judges, Senior Advocates

The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued bailable warrants against advocate Mukut Nath Verma for filing what it termed a “scandalous and frivolous” complaint against members of the Election Committee constituted to oversee the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) elections [Supreme Court Bar Association vs. BD Kaushik].

A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan passed the order after Verma failed to appear before the Court despite repeated directions.

The Court noted that his conduct, which included making defamatory allegations against senior members of the Bar and judges of the Supreme Court, prima facie amounted to criminal contempt.

The proceedings arose after the Court was informed that Verma had lodged a complaint with the Tilak Nagar police station in New Delhi accusing members of the Election Committee - Senior Advocates Vijay Hansaria, Jitendra Mohan Sharma, and Mahalakshmi Pavani - of manipulating the SCBA elections for oblique motives.

Hansaria, who chaired the Election Committee, appeared before the Bench and underscored the gravity of the allegations, saying that such conduct tarnished the reputation of SCBA.

“The reputation of the SCBA is involved,” Hansaria submitted.

Justice Surya Kant responded with a light remark on the atmosphere within the Bar, observing that spirited participation was sometimes part of its character.

“Unless you have some stage artists like him, the atmosphere will be very dry,” Justice Kant said.

Hansaria, however, maintained that such conduct could not go unchecked.

“People must not feel that they can say anything and get away with it,” he said.

The Bench then noted that Verma had been directed to appear before the Court on May 29 but had chosen to appear virtually instead of being present in court in person. His online appearance was not accepted and he was directed to appear physically on the next date. Despite this, he neither appeared before the Court nor sent any representative, and there was no indication that he had withdrawn the defamatory complaint.

The Court recorded that the complaint not only levelled serious allegations against members of the Election Committee but also contained insinuations against judges of the Supreme Court. It observed that if such action are left unchecked, it would undermine the dignity of the institution.

Finding his conduct to constitute prima facie contempt, the Bench ordered issuance of bailable warrants for ₹10,000 to secure Verma’s presence.

“Dr Mukut Nath Verma is neither present nor anyone else has entered appearance on his behalf. There’s no information or record that he has withdrawn the scandalous application or complaint he made to defame the members of the Election Committee. In fact, contents of the complaint would reveal that the said advocate has not spared the judges of this Court also,” the order said.

The Bench added that bailable warrants were necessary to ensure compliance.

“Owing to his conduct, which prima facie constitutes criminal contempt of Court, and the fact that he has not appeared despite categorical directions issued, let bailable warrants to the sum of ₹10,000 be issued to secure the presence of Dr Mukut Nath Verma,” the Court ordered.

It further directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the Station House Officer of Tilak Nagar police station to execute the warrants and ensure Verma’s presence on the next date of hearing, warning that failure to do so would result in non-bailable warrants.

Apart from addressing the complaint, the Bench also dealt with the issue of SCBA reforms.

It directed that the suggestions submitted by SCBA President Vikas Singh and recommendations of the 2025 Election Committee, chaired by Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, be uploaded on the official SCBA website. Members of the Bar have been permitted to submit their opinions within two weeks.