HC upholds protection for judicial independence; imposes Rs 25,000 costs for contempt plea against judicial officer

Reaffirming that judges cannot be hauled up for contempt for performing their judicial functions, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed with Rs 25,000 costs a contempt petition filed against a judicial officer after terming it legally untenable and contrary to settled principles protecting judicial independence.

Justice Nidhi Gupta held that “no contempt proceedings lie against a judicial officer for acts performed in the course of his/her judicial duties, as such acts are protected under law and are subject to correction only in appeal, revision, or other appropriate judicial remedy. The exercise of judicial functions cannot be made the subject matter of contempt jurisdiction.”

The ruling came during the hearing of a contempt petition alleging violation of a status quo in a civil suit. The matter pertains to the possession of a property in Jalandhar Model Town. During the course of the hearing, Himani Sarin – counsel for the respondent-judicial officer – pointed out that the petitioners were seeking “to proceed with contempt action against her in respect of acts done by her in discharge of her judicial functions. Her counsel submitted that contempt against a judicial officer, performing judicial functions/duties, was not maintainable.” In support, the counsel relied upon Supreme Court judgments.

The counsel for the petitioners, in turn, submitted that the contempt petition with regard to the judicial officer might be dismissed.

“In view the facts and the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners as well as respondent-judicial officer, the present contempt petition qua the judicial officer is not maintainable. The same is accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs 25,000 to be paid by the petitioners to the judicial officer within four weeks from today. It is made clear that if the amount of costs is not deposited within the stipulated time, the same shall be recoverable in accordance with law,” Justice Gupta asserted.