Gujarat: Lawyers' body president held guilty of criminal contempt of court

The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday held advocate Yatin Oza, who is also the president of Gujarat High Court Advocates' Association (GHCAA), guilty of criminal contempt of court in a suo motu case for his remarks on the judiciary during a press conference in June this year. The court will be pronouncing the punishment on Wednesday.

A division bench of the high court of justices Sonia Gokani and justice N V Anjaria pronounced the judgement holding Oza guilty. The operative part of the order uploaded late on Tuesday evening stated, "In view of the discussion above, this court in the exercise of powers conferred upon it under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, holds the respondent contemner (Oza) guilty of committing criminal contempt of this court within the meaning of section 2(c) (i) of the Contempt of Courts Act,1971."

On June 5, Oza had made several serious allegations on the Facebook live press conference. He had said, "The High Court is an absolute gambling den today, wherein only billionaires can gamble. If poor people gamble for five rupees at home, the police would arrest them. This is the situation of the High Court. High Court can file a contempt petition against me."

Oza had said this to make a point that during the lockdown it was difficult to get petitions listed for hearing in case the lawyers or clients were not influential. Days later, the high court took suo motu cognisance of his remarks and issued a notice for criminal contempt.

During the pendency of the contempt petition, a full-court stripped Oza off his "senior advocate" status. In the court, Oza tendered an unconditional apology but the court didn't consider it. While rejecting the apology, the division bench had said that a "clear and loud" message needed to be sent out that the judiciary is "open to every healthy criticism respecting the fundamental right of freedom of expression," but at the same time "attempts to tarnish its prestige will not be tolerated."

The bench headed by justice Gokani commented that "Any attempt to scandalise the court and browbeat the judges and thereby undermining the authority of the institution in our opinion cannot be taken lightly."

In order, the bench refused to believe Oza's argument that his remarks were a result of "emotional outburst" and said that "One cannot be oblivious that this institution for its credibility, trustworthiness and its independence, continues to rule in the hearts of common man to be its last resort against every kind of arbitrariness and violation of fundamental and human rights and to term it as a gambling den, as the Senior Advocate and the President of the Bar with authority, facts and figures and in the meeting of Press with ‘all requisite responsibilities’ could not be said prima facie to be the result of emotional upsurge or a momentary phase."