Court fight lands lawyer in a soup

But Pande, who insisted on a court recording, suddenly caught hold of Kurian’s shirt collar, following which a scuffle took place between the two lawyers. Dwivedi asked them to observe restraint. However, neither party paid any heed to the warning. The judge had to return to his chamber due to the prolonged confusion.

Dwivedi complained against Pande to the president of theIndustrial Court, Maharashtra. He also recorded statements of eye-witnesses to the scuffle. The Industrial Court further directed that the matter be placed before the High Court in the form of a criminal contempt petition. Thereafter, a criminal complaint was filed, which came up for final hearing a few days ago. Since the petitioner was a labour court judge, no advocate was required. Pande was represented by advocate C U Singh and the state government by R L Patil.

While holding Pande guilty of contempt, the division bench of Justice A V Sawant and Vishnu Sahai of the BHC stated that it had to “strike a delicate balance”. On one hand it had “to be slow and thoughtful in exercising the power of contempt” since contempt is not “meant to instill a sense of fear in public mind regarding criticism of courts”. However, on the other hand, willful contempnors cannot be let off scot-free as that would render “courts ineffective and judges as paper tigers”.

Pande has been ordered to pay a fine of Rs 2,000,which has to be deposited in the IInd Labour Court, Thane. However, the HC has saved Pande from a jail sentence, especially since he has tendered an unconditional apology for his misbehaviour. The apology states that “upon provocation offered by Kurian, he got carried away in his overzealousness, to protect the cause of the workman”.

A person guilty of contempt can be sentenced to six months of simple imprisonment. However, the judges have observed that acceptance of Pande’s apology and imposition of the fine, meets the ends of justice in this matter.