In Brief
Three members of the legal profession (Vijay Kurle, Rashid Khan Pathan, and Nilesh Ojha) filed lengthy complaints alleging bias, lack of legal knowledge, and ulterior motives against two Supreme Court judges who had convicted another advocate, Mathews Nedumpara, for contempt. The Supreme Court held all three guilty of contempt, finding that while fair criticism of judicial decisions is protected, attributing motives to judges, questioning their integrity or ability, and making scurrilous allegations amounts to contempt. The Court affirmed its inherent constitutional power under Article 129 to punish contempt independent of statutory restrictions and found the defence of truth unavailable as no material evidence was produced to support the serious allegations made.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.