Supreme Court Stays Contempt Proceedings In Gujarat High Court Against Judicial Officer

The Supreme Court recently stayed the contempt proceedings in the Gujarat High Court initiated against a judicial officer, an Additional Senior Civil Judge.

The judicial officer approached the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Gujarat High Court which allowed his addition as a respondent in a contempt petition filed by a person who alleged that he was illegally arrested in violation of the Supreme Court's guidelines in the Arnesh Kumar case.

The officer, A.M. Bhukharee, stated that in November 2020, he happened to witness an altercation between the man (who filed the contempt petition) and his wife (also a judicial officer), whereby the former was forcefully trying to snatch away the infant daughter of the latter. The wife  lodged an FIR in December 2021 against the husband for offences under Section 498A and other provisions relating to hurt(S.323,324), cheating (420) etc. under the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner said that he accompanied the woman to the police station as a neighbour and a witness.

The police arrested the man in December 2021 and was later released on bail. In April 2022, he filed a contempt petition in the High Court against police officers alleging illegal arrest. In February 2023, he filed an application to add the petitioner, his wife and the public prosecutor as respondents in the contempt petition, alleging that they abetted the illegal arrest.

In March 2024, the petitioner and the wife of the person who filed the contempt petition in the HC were suspended from judicial service. In September 2024, the High Court passed the impugned order, allowing the addition of the petitioner and the wife of the contempt petitioner as respondents in the contempt petition.

The High Court rejected the argument of the petitioner that the proceedings were barred by limitation. The High Court also said that the allegations required closer factual examination.

In the Special Leave Petition filed before the Supreme Court, the petitioner contended that he had no role in the arrest of the person and that he was only a witness in the FIR. It was contended that the Supreme Court's directions in the Arnesh Kumar case were intended to bind the police officers and not a private individual. He asserted that in the case, he was not acting in any capacity as a judicial officer but as a witness.  The petitioner also argued that the application to add him as a party was filed beyond the period of one year limitation provided under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act.

On November 29, a bench comprising Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan issued notice to the respondents on the contempt petition.

"Until further orders, there shall be stay of contempt proceedings against the petitioner herein," the Court ordered.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, Advocates Nizam Pasha, Talib Mustafa, Raksha Aggarwal, Abhishek Singh, Ahmad Ibrahim, Sidharth Kaushik, LZafeer Ahmad BF appeared for the petitioner

Case : AM Bhukharee v. Kshitijkumar Satishbhai Banker and others SLP (c) 27304/2024