Senior Advocate Files Writ Petition Seeking Inquiry Against Sitting Judge Of J&K&L High Court After He Was 'Summarily Sentenced To Judicial Custody' For Criminal Contempt

Senior Advocate Abdul Majid Dar of the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has filed a writ petition seeking inquiry against Justice Javed Iqbal Wani in accordance with the in-house procedure after he was allegedly summarily sentenced by the Judge to judicial custody until 5:30 pm for criminal contempt of court and he was allegedly detained in Court by Police and CRPF for 45-50 minutes.

The Senior Advocate has also filed a letters patent appeal against the order passed against him on August 23. "Without following due process, and without adherence to the Contempt of Court Act or established procedures, the Petitioner was summarily sentenced to judicial custody until 5:30 PM. The episode lasted about 45-50 minutes", the senior lawyer says in his writ petition.

It is contended in the petition that the Senior Advocate was delayed by 30 minutes for a hearing for which he had already instructed his client to arrange an alternative representation. Consequently, Senior Advocate, Mr. Syed Faisal Qadri, was engaged to argue, however Dar was able to reach the Court with a minor delay at 4 pm. But on reaching the Court, when he sought two minutes from the bench, Justice Wani turned down his request in 'high pitch tone' which almost resembled that he had lost his temper. Pursuant to which, in that ‘exasperated moment’, he was compelled to use the word "ridiculous". Subsequently, the Judge promptly began dictating the order in open court, summoning security officers, including CRPF personnel stationed outside Court No. 10, along with the Registrar Judicial and Joint Registrar. Dar was ordered into judicial custody until 5:30 PM or until the Court rose that day. Therefore, Dar alleged that the Judge in the instant while acting both as judge and a witness pronounced the verdict and punishment in an arbitrary manner. He has further alleged that the confinement, lasting approximately 45 to 50 minutes, "...took place in violation of established legal principles, causing immeasurable prejudice and casting unwarranted aspersions on his character and caused immense prejudice to the rights of the Complainant and an act of insinuation and an act of imputation in the estimation of battery of lawyers who assembled at that time".

The order passed by the Judge concerned on August 23 reads as follows:-

"While the court was dictating the order in the matter, Mr. A. M. Dar, Senior Advocate, sitting in the court next to Mr. Qadiri, stood up and contended that he be also heard in the matter for the petitioner. In response, the court observed that since one Senior Advocate has already argued on behalf of the petitioner and has sought time for producing the copy of the suit, it would not be appropriate to rehear the matter on behalf of the same party through another counsel. On this observation of the court, Mr. Dar reacted furiously and shouted that “this is ridiculous” and that there is no bar in hearing other counsel for the same party in a matter. The court requested Mr. Dar to take his seat and allow the court to proceed with dictating the order in the matter, however, Mr. Dar interrupted the court proceedings and did not allow the court to dictate the order and also to deal with the rest of the cases in the list. The court continued to request Mr. Dar to take his seat and instead he continued to interrupt the court proceedings. The other advocates present in the court including few senior advocates also requested Mr. Dar to take the seat and to allow the court to proceed in the matter, but Mr. Dar refused and kept shouting and interrupting the court proceedings compelling the court to convey Mr. Dar that his conduct warrants initiation of contempt proceedings against him, in response thereof Mr. Dar removed his robes in the open court and created a scene."

However, the order further says that "Having regard to the aforesaid principles of law and taking note of the requests made by the advocates present in the court including some senior advocates as also the remorse and repentance shown by Mr. Dar by his conduct, it is deemed appropriate not to proceed further in the matter. As such, proceedings are dropped."

In his plea, Dar says that the order uploaded in the case contain "distortions and omissions".

“The Appellant, a luminary of the legal fraternity, a vanguard of justice, and an ardent devotee of the Constitution, bows with the utmost reverence before this Hon'ble Court, invoking its venerable jurisdiction under Clause 12 of Letters Patent. The appellant beseeches this Hon’ble Court to rectify the grievous miscarriage of justice, to vindicate the principles of equity and fairness, and to revive the honour and integrity that have been unjustly sullied”, it is contended in the appeal filed against the order.

"That, from an extensive perusal of the duties entrusted to both Hon'ble Judges and members of the Bar, a central doctrine emerges - the Doctrine of Reciprocation. The Bench and the Bar are two pillars upon which the edifice of justice rests, and their synergy is imperative for the effective administration of justice in our society. This symbiotic relationship underscores the pivotal role played by both branches, and it is incumbent upon each to uphold the highest standards of ethics and decorum", the plea further reads.