Delhi High Court: In a case during final arguments, the plaintiff allegedly made derogatory remarks against the court via video conference. Neena Bansal Krishna, J., issued a show-cause notice, requiring the plaintiff to explain why she should not be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and directed her to appear in person on the next hearing date, along with her passport and visa impoundment if she returns to India.
The plaintiff, who had joined the proceedings via video conferencing, allegedly made derogatory remarks against the court. Specifically, she expressed dissatisfaction with the sequence of items taken up, questioning why Item No. 11 was addressed before Item No. 10. Furthermore, she used offensive language, denigrating the court’s proceedings.
The plaintiff used terms like How Could Item No. 11 Be Taken Before Item No. 10” and also saying that “Ye Saali Kya Kar Rahi Hai, What The F*** is Going on in this Court”.
The Court took suo motu cognizance of the contemptuous behavior and issued a show-cause notice to the plaintiff, who is currently residing in Sydney, Australia, requiring her to explain why she should not be subjected to punishment under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The Court directed the plaintiff to appear in person on the next date of hearing on 16-04-2024 to ensure her presence and further directed the FRRO to impound her passport and visa if she returns to India before the specified hearing date, preventing her from leaving the country without the court’s direction.
The Court also directed the High Commission of India at Canberra, Australia to communicate the court’s order to Anita Kumari Gupta through the Consulate General of India in Sydney, Australia.
[Anita Kumari Gupta v Ved Bhushan, CS(OS) 1093 of 2011, decided on 10-01-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Sunil Mehta & Mr. Ishan Roy Choudhary, Advocates for plaintiff
Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan, Advocate for defendants
