Journalism of Courage
‘Scandalises judiciary’: School teacher faces contempt action for calling judge corrupt
The Himachal Pradesh High Court said that reckless corruption allegations against a judicial officer may amount to criminal contempt and scandalise the judiciary.
The man was serving in Dayanand Public School,
The Mall, Shimla, as a computer teacher. (AI-generated image)
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has paved the way for contempt proceedings against a teacher who approached it over an allegedly “fake” experience certificate, after the court said that “an allegation of corruption against a judicial officer without foundation,” made recklessly, amounts to an attempt to “scandalise the judiciary.”
Justice Rakesh Kainthla observed that the man alleged that a judicial officer had prepared a false report to illegally protect the other two accused, describing it as a “clear-cut sign of corruption.”
“An allegation of corruption against a judicial officer without foundation made recklessly, prima facie, amounts to Criminal Contempt of Court as it is an attempt to scandalise the judiciary,” the August 25 order said.
The order directed the matter to be placed before an “appropriate bench having a roster for taking proper action, if deemed proper, for making reckless and scandalous allegations against a member of the judiciary.”
Justice Rakesh Kainthla said that corruption allegations against a judicial officer are an attempt to scandalise the judiciary.
Experience certificate sparks a legal battle
The man worked as a computer teacher at a Shimla school from 2007. After he was suspended in 2019 and removed from service in 2021, he sought an experience certificate from the school. He alleged that the certificate wrongly described him as a PRT instead of TGT and did not mention that he was taking classes from classes 4 to 10.
He claimed that the certificate was deliberately falsified to harm him and filed a criminal complaint alleging forgery. The magistrate dismissed the complaint, saying an error in the certificate could be corrected by approaching the school authorities. There was no criminal intent as required for the commission of the offence. Therefore, the complaint was dismissed.
The man argued that the school erred in not initiating the proceedings against the accused despite having the evidence on record. He contended that the experience certificate mentioned the designation PRT instead of TGT, and that it was a fake experience certificate, and it amounted to forgery, which is a cognizable offence.
Story continues below this ad
The trial court held that mentioning the wrong designation of the complainant or the non-mentioning of the classes being taught by the complainant in the experience certificate did not constitute any offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code.
Wrong certificate, but no forgery
The court held that an incorrect statement in a document does not make it a “false document” in law, and said that there was no reason to interfere with the orders dismissing the complaint.
The court also said that it was not the first time that the man had approached the court by filing such petitions, and therefore, it was necessary to take effective steps to prevent the man from wasting the court’s “precious time”, and imposed Rs 10,000 in costs, which will be submitted to the Chief Justice Disaster Relief Fund within a period of four weeks.
© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Advertisement
Live Blog
Advertisement