Dismissed Punjab DSP Sekhon arrested for contempt of court

“By putting forth material on the social sites, they have not only by visible representation scandalized and lowered the authority of this Court and have interfered with the course of judicial proceedings and gone on to obstruct the administration of justice and, thus, have fallen foul of Sections 2(c)(i) to (iii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 ,” the Court observed. ”

The court also issued directions to the Ministry of Electronics and IT and to the Chandigarh administration and its DGP and SSP to block access to any information about the videos uploaded by Sekhon and Sharma and also about any such video on Marwaha’s or any other channel.

“The registrar (computerisation) shall also prepare a list of all the offending videos pertaining to court proceedings which have been circulated by respondents Sekhon, Sharma and Marwaha and shall also supply the said information to the Union [government and the] Chandigarh administration so that the airing on the social sites by Facebook, YouTube and Twitter is stopped forthwith, who are intermediaries. The designated officer of the Union of India shall take necessary steps to ensure the blocking of access of all videos circulated by the said persons,” said the bench.

The court has also ordered the authorities to submit a compliance report by February 22, failing which action under section 79(3) of the Information Technology Act shall be liable to be taken against Facebook, YouTube and Twitter.

The Bench noted that Sekhon, who had filed a writ petition in 2021 challenging the order of his dismissal from service, had been circulating videos pertaining to the judicial proceedings which are being conducted by other judges.

The Bench also also noted that in one of the videos, referring to more several high court and one Suprem Court judge, “scandalous allegations” have been made by Sekhon who was asked to answer the charge.

The Court said that on February 15, after the court hearing ended, Sekhon and Sharma aired themselves in open public at the entrance of the Court and launched a vicious tirade on the proceedings which had been conducted.

“Freedom of speech and expression is protected under the Constitution but it is not an unfettered right and as much there are constitutional rights, there are duties also enshrined upon the citizens of the country. The continued misconduct of Sekhon and Sharma and fanned by Marwaha…by putting forth material on the social sites…they have by visible representation scandalized and lowered the authority of this Court and have interfered with the course of judicial proceedings and gone on to obstruct the administration of justice,” the bench observed.

“In a video, Sharma stated that some sealed reports had been received (by court) in the year 2017 but had not been opened in spite of several Benches having changed and none of the judges had the guts to open the said reports and claimed that he should be appointed as a nodal officer so that he could monitor the opening of the said sealed reports. He further stated that he wanted to address the Court but was not given opportunity and stated that if it is not done, contempt notice should also be issued to him. He was highly aggrieved that why contempt notice has been issued to his accomplice Sekhon. He further suggested that the working of this Court should be improved. He disparagedly remarked about one of us and the fact that his father was also a Chief Justice and he also did not have the guts to open the reports. Sekhon then named two senior police officials, due to which, the reports had not been opened and he claimed to be a whistle blower and that the Bench would wet its pants if the envelopes are opened. It was further commented that the Judges have been leashed by a certain set of people”, read the HC order.

The court said that later Sekhon, Sharma and Marwaha “in an effort to further tarnish the reputation of this court,” uploaded another video

“…Judges have been abused to the extent that certain words have been used which we do not wish to put in our order. Personal allegations have been levelled against the Bench, which was hearing the matter,” said the HC.