HC fines father-son lawyers Rs 1 lakh costs, Rs 4,000 for threatening magistrate in Arni court
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court also directed that the case against the two advocates be sent to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa for disciplinary action.
Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has imposed costs of Rs 1 lakh and a fine of Rs 4,000 on two lawyers, a father and son. The case concerns alleged misbehaviour and threats towards a judge in court and obstruction of judicial proceedings. The High Court also directed that the matter be referred to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa for disciplinary action against both.
A bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Justice Raj Wakode heard the case on Monday and made strong observations. The bench said threatening judges, raising one's voice at them and obstructing judicial proceedings were serious matters. The court said this was not merely an insult to one judge but an attack on the reputation of the entire justice system.
The case is from Arni in Yavatmal district. The two lawyers have been identified as Advocate Sagar Rathod and his father, Advocate Durgadas Rathod. The incident took place on November 26, 2021, when a case was being heard in the court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sajiduzzaman Mohammad Hanif Shahid.
It is stated that the warrant against an accused had not been cancelled. Angered by this, the two lawyers allegedly misbehaved with the judge. They are alleged to have told the judge that they would "see to him", would take action by passing a Bar resolution, and would place evidence of corruption before senior officials.
The High Court took a serious view of the conduct. It said such behaviour affects the ability of judicial officers to work independently. The bench made clear that addressing judicial officers in the language of threats or pressure is not merely an insult to one judge, and also affects the reputation and impartiality of the justice system. The court said such cases cannot be ignored.
Both lawyers had tendered an unconditional apology before the court, but the High Court refused to accept it. The court said an apology must be a sign of genuine remorse and cannot be a strategy to escape punishment or a mere paper formality.
The High Court then imposed costs of Rs 1 lakh and a fine of Rs 4,000 on both lawyers, and directed that the matter be sent to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa for disciplinary action.
