In Brief

The Supreme Court addressed a contempt petition arising from a transfer petition that made scandalous allegations against a High Court Judge, implying partiality based on a political figure's involvement in the case. The Court held that High Court Judges are constitutional functionaries with the same immunity as Supreme Court Judges and are not subordinate in administration. The Court ruled that mere involvement of a political figure cannot justify transfer of proceedings. It emphasized that lawyers making unsubstantiated scandalous allegations against Judges are themselves guilty of contempt, and when duty to court conflicts with duty to client, duty to court must prevail. The Court permitted the alleged contemnors to tender unconditional apology to the High Court Judge, emphasizing that forgiveness of acknowledged mistakes reflects the true majesty of law.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.