E-Paper
Dabholkar case: Defence lawyer files contempt application against lawyer alleging conspiracy
Special UAPA court in Pune was presented with an application for initiating a contempt of court hearing against advocate Rathod for writing an article about the Dabholkar case accusing the court and accused to be hand in glove in a conspiracy to ensure acquittal for those booked in the case
PUNE: The special Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) court in Pune was presented with an application for initiating a contempt of court hearing against advocate Nihal Singh Rathod for writing an article about the Narendra Dabholkar court case accusing the court and accused to be hand in glove in a conspiracy to ensure acquittal for those booked in the case.
Additional sessions judge SR Navandar had declared in open court during the hearing of a bail application by one of the accused, Virendrasinh Tawade, that his court was specially notified to hear cases under UAPA. Advocate Singh, in his article, claimed that there is no official notification to prove that and the court machinery was gearing up to give this advantage to the accused so they could use the technicality of the matter being out of his jurisdiction in order to get out of the jail.
Upon being presented with the application, Judge Navandar said, “I will study it, read it and if it is found to be written with an intention to malign the court, action will be taken. The way it has been done is absolutely improper, especially on the day of the hearing.”
The contempt of court application was filed by advocate Prakash Shalsingikar who alleged that the article author-lawyer has vested interests in the matter which has led him to ensure that the article be published on a day when the case was entering its first day of trial.
“A reading of the article shows that the same predicts the outcome of the trial and such a prediction is per se an act contemptuous towards the court. Secondly, it claims that this honourable court is conducting a trial without authority. There is apparent possibility that such claim would give an impression to the readers that this court does not have knowledge of law as regards its own jurisdiction. Thirdly, it suggests that the accused are quiet/silent since they want to take advantage of alleged technical loophole. Such a suggestion has an apparent possibility of giving an impression to readers that the court does not have knowledge of law, but the accused have knowledge of law better than the court. Lastly, the article specifically alleges that the technical flaw with regard to jurisdiction is created deliberately and that such a thing would not be tolerated,” reads a part of the application by Shalsingikar.
Special public prosecutor Prakash Suryavanshi narrated a similar incident from the time when he was prosecuting a sex scandal from Parbhani and said, “I learned the lesson to take such applications and throw them in the dustbin.” He said that the court acknowledging the article will be giving it undue legitimacy. The defence lawyer, however, also asked for the newspaper and its editors to be prosecuted for allowing Rathod’s article to be published. To this, judge Navandar said, “When they can comment on the fate of the trial, they can certainly predict the fate of their decisions too.”
The judge addressed a reporter from the English daily of the same company that publishes the Marathi daily to become a media between the court and the establishment and send a message. The reporter had come to cover the ongoing proceedings.
The application has been set aside for the judge’s consideration and a decision will be made on it in later hearings, according to the judge’s claims in open court.
