Delhi HC sentences Adv. Seema Sapra to one month imprisonment forcontempt

Advocate Seema Sapra, who practices in Delhi High Court and is known for making allegations against lawyers and judges, has been found guilty of contempt of court by the Delhi High Court..The High Court has sentenced Sapra to one month imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 2000 for contempt of court. In addition, she has also been barred from arguing before any court or tribunal for a period of two years..The judgment was pronounced by a Division Bench comprising Justice Valmiki J Mehta and Justice PS Teji in a contempt case initiated against Sapra by a Bench comprising Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice Vibhu Bhakru after she had alleged Justice Bhakru of being corrupt..The context of her allegation was the constitution of Bench of Justice S. Muralidhar and Justice Vibhu Bakhru which according to Sapra was done in an improper manner and “deceptively”. She had then accused Justice Bhakru of corruption in open court and persisted with her accusation despite warning from the Bench. The Bench had then passed an order charging her with criminal contempt in the face punishable under Section 14(1) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. Subsequently, the contempt case was heard by another Bench on Sapra’s request..This Bench presided by Justice Valmiki Mehta, which heard the case dealt with various submissions made by Sapra..The court held that corruption is a very serious charge against a judge and cannot be made recklessly without any material to substantiate the same..“Corruption is a very serious charge against the Judge and the institution of Court itself which scandalizes judiciary and interferes or tends to substantially interfere with the due course of justice if the allegation of corruption is unsubstantiated, and in fact not even remotely established. Self serving stands of corruption of Judges, and which have no valid basis, cannot be a basis that because ‘corruption’ is alleged hence there is liberty to make wild allegations of corruption against judges. The noticee has failed to substantiate in any manner whatsoever the charge of corruption of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru and therefore, clearly the noticee is guilty of contempt of Court. The responsibility of the noticee is much higher inasmuch as, the noticee is an Advocate who is well versed with the legal procedures and the law. Advocates have higher duties than ordinary litigants with respect to court procedures and contemptuous statements.”.Sapra had further contended that Justice Bhakru was not entitled to hear the case as he was a lawyer for one of the parties to the dispute, M/s General Electric Company; and that was one of the reasons for her allegations. The court however, held the following with regard to that argument:.“Once again this argument is a totally baseless argument because this stand has not been substantiated upon. Self serving averments made by the noticee of her discussing the facts of W.P.(C) No.1280/2012 are only convenient allegations and this Court completely disbelieves the same. Obviously, the argument of noticee discussing the case with Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru in the lobby of this Court have been made only to somehow or the other wriggle out of the contempt notice issued by this Court. This argument is also therefore rejected.”.The Court also dismissed Sapra’s argument that she is being harassed by police who is trying to poison her..“The last argument urged by the noticee is that she is being harassed by the police who is trying to poison her. (ii) This Court has really failed to understand as to how police harassing the noticee and making of the allegations by her that she is sought to be poisoned by the police, can in any manner justify noticee from calling a Judge of this Court as corrupt. It is not a justification for a noticee to state that she is calling a Judge of this Court corrupt without any basis whatsoever, and that too simply because the police is allegedly harassing her. In fact, even the charge that the police was harassing the noticee is a wild and unsubstantiated charge against the police and a similar aspect hasalready been dealt with and rejected vide paras 25 and 26 of the Judgment dated 2.3.2015 in W.P.(C) No.1280/2012.”.The Court, therefore, held her to be in criminal contempt of court and also came down upon her for “seeking to overawe different Benches” of the Delhi High Court..“The facts of this case show that the contemnor is not in any manner contrite. Contemnor has been seeking to overawe different Benches of this Court and has caused recusal of different Benches hearing the main writ petition W.P.(C) No.1280/2012. After recusal by 28 Judges of this Court the main writ petition was heard by this Court and dismissed in terms of the Judgment dated 02.03.2015. Petitioner has continued in the same vein even in these contempt proceedings as noted in the Order dated 30.10.2015.”.Based on the above, Sapra has been sentenced to one month imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 2000. She has also been barred from arguing as an Advocate or in person (except in her defence) before any court or tribunal for two years..The Court has, also made it clear that the operative part of this judgment pertaining to imposition of punishment will not operate for a period of three months from today to enable Sapra to pursue appropriate legal remedies..Sapra can be spotted regularly in Delhi High Court and is often seen making remarks during the hearing of cases and getting into arguments with other lawyers.