Calcutta High Court Addresses Misconduct in Courtroom
The Calcutta High Court has expressed its grave concerns over an incident involving an advocate’s alleged use of inappropriate slang during a court proceeding. The incident occurred after a case, in which the advocate represented a client, was dismissed. The court’s reaction came in the matter titled In Re: Firdous Samim.
Judicial Reaction to Misconduct
A Division Bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Atarup Banerjee, emphasized the seriousness of the advocate’s behavior, highlighting the potential harm to the court’s reputation. The Bench remarked, “Our High Court advocate. It is going all over India, that your High Court, you have these sorts of advocates and you people keep silent and don’t take any remedial measure.”
Incident Details and Court’s Response
The incident under scrutiny occurred on July 23, during which advocate Firdous Samim allegedly used scandalous language. The court took notice of this on July 30, issuing a notice to Samim to show cause why he should not face criminal contempt proceedings.
The court stated, “The language used by the said advocate during the court hearing, which was being streamed live, is an act of misdemeanour and reflects an audacious and contemptuous attitude towards this Hon’ble High Court.” The Bench was particularly concerned as Samim, an experienced advocate, refrained from repeating the slang in court, yet offered an apology.
Deliberations on Courtroom Decorum
The Bench rejected the argument that the slang was not aimed at the judge, expressing that it could be perceived as a broader comment against the judiciary. The court acknowledged the pressures faced by advocates but maintained that such pressures do not justify lapses in courtroom decorum.
More Read
“You are handling so much of pressure,” the court noted, “but this is not expected.” The Bench emphasized the importance of addressing disagreements with judges through appropriate channels rather than resorting to intemperate remarks.
Implications and Next Steps
The court dismissed suggestions to view the incident as a mere lapse in temper, stressing the importance of maintaining professional standards. “Basic training in law, that we cannot say that your lordship is wrong,” the court observed, “We have to say that your lordship may give a second thought… That is advocacy.”
The court directed Samim to apologize to the concerned judge with a written undertaking promising not to repeat such conduct. The Bench will decide on proceeding with the contempt case after reviewing the apology and undertaking.
More Read
Senior Advocate Jayanta Mitra represented Samim during the hearing.
