In Brief

This contempt case arose from a joint complaint by the Bombay Bar Association and Bombay Incorporated Law Society against four respondents regarding an allegedly contumacious communication. The Court discharged respondent no.4 (Mathews Nedumpara) at the interlocutory stage, finding no direct material linking him to the communication. While he denied knowledge of respondents no.1 and 2 and disclaimed authorship, the Court reserved the right to summon him again if evidence of his involvement emerged during trial. Respondents no.1, 2, and 3 were directed to file replies, with no determination made on respondent no.3's status."

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