![High Court Issues Contempt Notice to Man Seeking Death Penalty for Judge [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2023/09/lj_4214_6a5a7260-01b9-4c1b-af8e-d5e1c76c3f87.jfif)
NEW DELHI: The High Court has issued a criminal contempt of court notice to a man for a plea seeking the death penalty for a High Court judge, saying it cannot disregard vilification of this magnitude against a judge of this court as there is fine line of distinction between critique and allegations fuelled by disdain and a hostile intent.
A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula said the plea contains "unsubstantiated and whimsical allegations" aimed at lowering the court's authority.
The court's order came on August 31 while hearing a petition by Naresh Sharma, an IIT alumnus, challenging a decision by a single- judge Bench of the High Court which had rejected his initial plea.
Sharma had alleged that hundreds of institutes of national importance, including IITs, IIMs, and AIIMS, are "criminally established organisations" as they are registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, giving them a legal option to disobey the government and "even join forces against it.
In its detailed order, the bench said, "The present appeal contains unsubstantiated and whimsical allegations of criminal acts by Single Judge seeking the punishment of death penalty and a comparison of the judge to the devil, which is distasteful and unacceptable."
"These averments are prima facie aimed at scandalising and lowering the authority of the Court. In our opinion, the statements have been advanced with the malafide intention to interfere with the administration of justice. This Court cannot disregard vilification of this magnitude against a judge of this Court. There is fine line of distinction which separates critique from allegations fuelled by disdain and a hostile intent to scandalise the court. The pleadings in the present appeal amount to the latter category and must be taken cognizance of," the bench added.
The court sought a response from the appellant why criminal contempt proceedings be not initiated against him and put the matter for further consideration on September 18 before the roster bench.
