Delhi HC sentences 12 to jail for obstructing court work in 2015 raid in Kolkata

The bench found the 12 individuals guilty of contempt and sentenced each of them to one day of simple imprisonment

Interfering with the duties of court-appointed commissioners constitutes obstruction of justice, observed the Delhi High Court as it sentenced 12 individuals to one day of simple imprisonment for assaulting and hindering commissioners during their official visit to Kolkata in January 2015.

(HT Archive)

A bench of justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar delivered the ruling on Friday while hearing a criminal contempt petition initiated suo motu, based on a complaint from one of the 11 lawyers appointed to carry out raids, on shops across five markets in Kolkata, allegedly involved in selling counterfeit Samsung products.

In his complaint, the lawyer stated that they were assaulted by an unruly mob of 200 people, including several shopkeepers and salespersons from the area who obstructed them from carrying out the court’s 2014 directive.

The amicus curiae Varun Goswami submitted that the mob planned not only to restrain the lawyers from performing their duties but also to create a fear in their minds and thus thwart the wheels of justice. On the other hand, the individuals tendered an unconditional apology in unison. They submitted that they were not aware of the orders, as they had not been served upon them.

In its 44-page judgment, the bench found the 12 individuals guilty of contempt and sentenced each of them to one day of simple imprisonment along with a fine of ₹2,000. The court acknowledged that the individuals had offered an unconditional apology, but emphasised that punishment was necessary given the seriousness of their actions, which included manhandling court-appointed advocate commissioners and police officers, who sustained serious injuries.

“Interfering with the work assigned to the advocate commissioners amounts to interference in the administration of justice. If such of those persons who have interfered with the administration of justice are not dealt with heavy hands, the majesty of law will come down in the eyes of ordinary citizens which will have a deleterious effect on the fabric of the society,” the court said.

It added, “It is, therefore, imperative; rather, the duty of the court, to ensure that people who interfere in the administration of justice are dealt with severely so that people respect and adhere to law for the rule of law to prevail.”