Justice Rajasekhar Mantha Of Calcutta HC Initiates Contempt Proceedings Against Lawyers For Ruckus Outside Courtroom

Justice Rajasekhar Mantha of the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against lawyers who held protests outside his courtroom on Monday. 

On Monday, largescale chaos prevailed outside the courtroom of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha after a section of lawyers prevented him from continuing with proceedings. Several posters describing Justice Mantha as a "disgrace in the name of the judiciary" were seen pasted inside the premises of the Calcutta High Court and also near the judge’s residence in south Kolkata. Due to the ruckus, proceedings of Justice Mantha’s courtroom had to be temporarily stalled.

It may be noted that Justice Mantha on December 8 last year had passed an order staying over 26 FIRs lodged against BJP MLA and Leader of Opposition in Assembly, Suvendu Adhikari, and directed the state government to take the permission of the court before lodging any FIR against him in the future. Earlier, Justice Mantha had removed protection granted to Maneka Gambhir, the sister-in-law of TMC general secretary Abhishek Banerjee in a money laundering case.

Furthermore, in a purported rift in the Calcutta High Court Bar Association regarding the protests held outside the courtroom of Justice Mantha on Monday, the Vice President and the Executive Committee members of the Bar Association have also written to Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava on Tuesday condemning the resolution allegedly passed by the Bar Association on Monday calling for a boycott of Justice Mantha’s courtroom.

The resolution in question dated January 9th has been signed by Assistant Secretary of the Bar Association Sonal Sinha and has urged the Bar to abstain from attending court proceedings before Justice Mantha.

“The Bar Association upon deliberation and consideration of the latter and tensed situation inside the court premises, it is hereby unanimously resolved by the members of the Bar in the urgent General Body meeting that the members of the Bar Association shall abstain from judicial proceeding before the court of Hon’ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha for dispensation of judicial work and for maintaining peace and tranquillity amongst the members of the Bar”, the resolution reads.

The protesting lawyers had also addressed a letter to the Chief Justice on Monday accusing Justice Mantha of being partial and thus urged the Chief Justice to relieve him. 

The letter signed by protesting Bar Association members reads, “It is the consenting opinion of all members bar that we only have our staunch adherence to principles of natural justice, directed by your guidance as the sole available means to combat it. In its perfect world, words aren’t necessary for the times when the partiality of authority is understood to be apparent. Let this representation record our humble request for your lordship to relieve Justice Rajshekhar Mantha from his current determination and liberate him from his current responsibilities.”

Responding to the aforementioned resolution, as well as the ensuing protests, Vice President Kallol Mondal and the Executive Committee members of the Bar Association have stated in the letter that they have no knowledge of the purported resolution calling for a boycott of Justice Mantha’s courtroom.

“We, the Vice President and the Elected members of the Executive Committee of the Bar Association, High Court at Calcutta have come across a purported resolution dated 9th January 2023 that an alleged resolution has been passed on 9.1.2023 in an alleged urgent General Body Meeting. However, as the elected Vice President and Executive committee members of the said Bar Association, we would like to inform Your Lordship that no notice for any such alleged General Body Meeting was given or circulated and/or any alleged letter dated 9.1.2021 was placed in any meeting of the elected members”, the letter reads.

Further, underscoring that suo motu criminal contempt proceedings must be initiated against the protesting lawyers, the letter states,

“Those unruly advocates have also pasted posters with Hon’ble Judge’s photographs in the area of High Court at Calcutta, which is not only contemptuous as such we request Your Lordship to suo motu issue a rule of criminal contempt against those unruly advocates and the Elected members of Bar Association, High Court at Calcutta who have signed the purported resolution dated 9th January, 2023 and as the said elected members of the Bar Association have supported such contemptuous action”.

Deputy Solicitor General Billwadal Bhattacharya told Live Law that the matter was mentioned today before Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and an affidavit was also placed before the Chief Justice's bench apprising the Court about the latest developments regarding the ongoing protests against Justice Mantha. 

"A section of lawyers mentioned the issue before the Hon'ble Chief Justice at 2pm. An affidavit was also affirmed indicating whatever has been happening. Your Lordships have taken note of the affidavit and said that they will be considering the affidavit and passing necessary orders on the affidavit. We invited the Lordships to issue suo motu rule of contempt against the wrong doers because no one can basically obstruct the ongoing court proceedings in such a fashion. This is absolute direct interference and contempt of court on the face of it", Bhattacharya said. 

Responding to the seeming rift in the Calcutta High Court Bar Association regarding the proposed boycott of Justice Mantha's courtroom and the purported resolution passed on Monday to this effect, the Deputy Solicitor General said, 

"As ordinary members of the bar we do not have any knowledge about any such resolution. I really don't know..majority of the members of the bar do not know about it and I do not know if Mrs. Sonal Sinha has conveyed the letter and whether at all it's a letter issued by her or not."

He added, "..it is like a bolt from the blue that how such resolution can be taken and there is a rule before conveying meeting notices have to be circulated. There was no notice nothing. It is a concerted conspiracy to obstruct and interfere with the court proceedings. It is an attack on the institution".