Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court today (August 11) directed the lawyers involved in filing a transfer petition with 'scurrilous and scandalous' remarks against a sitting Telangana High Court Judge, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya, to place their unconditional apology before the judge within one week.

Justice Bhattacharya was requested to consider and decide the issue of acceptance of the apology tendered.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and AS Chandukar was hearing the suo motu contempt proceedings initiated against lawyers who agreed to file a transfer petition with 'scurrilous and scandalous' remarks against a sitting Telangana High Court Judge, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya.

The Counsels appearing on notice tendered an unconditional apology.

Considering the same, the bench observed that the apology was made to the present Court and not the concerned High Court Judge. It directed the Registrar General of the Telangana High Court to reopen the matter before Justice Bhattacharya to decide on the issue of acceptance of the said apology within one week.

“The apology would reveal that the appeal is rendered fully to this court. In our view allegations are against the High Court Judge; it would be more appropriate to tender an apology to the High Court Judge. We permit the respondents to tender the unconditional apology before the High Court Judge.

We direct the Registrar General of HC to reopen the said matter before the learned judge and the judge to pass a final order in the said matter. Respondents are to tender the same apology to the judge within a period of 1 week of reopening. The judge is to consider the issue of acceptance of apology within a period of 1 week.”

Trend To Make Baseless Allegation Against HC & Trial Court Judges And Seek Case Transfer In Political Cases : SC Flags

The bench also expressed the need to discourage the rising trend of lawyers criticising high court and trial court judges. It also underlined the prevalent issue of assuming that no justice will be delivered in a state where the matter involves a political figure. It observed :

HC Judges Not Inferior To SC Judges As Per Constitutional Scheme; Duty Of Apex Court To Protect Them From Scandalous Allegations

The bench also observed that as per the Constitutional scheme, the judges of the High Court are equal in stature to judges of the Supreme Court, irrespective of the latter's power to modify or set aside High Court decisions.

"The judges of the High Court are also constitutional functionaries; they enjoy the same immunity as judges of the Supreme Court. Under the constitutional scheme, the judges of the High Court are in no way inferior to judges in the Supreme Court. Though judges of the Supreme Court can reverse, affirm, or modify the decision of judges of the High Court, it has no administrative control over either the administration of the High Court or the judges of the High Court."

"As such scandalous allegations are made against the judges; it becomes the duty of this Court to protect the judges of the High Court."

The bench clarified that the courts gained no pleasure in drastically penalising lawyers and signalled its scope for forgiveness.

"We repeat that the courts have no pleasure in penalising the lawyers for acting in a manner which will amount to interference with this court."

The bench referred to the recent instance where it held that lawyers should not be castigated for small mistakes, as that may affect their career detrimentally. It noted that in that case, the key observation was that " Majesty of law lies not in punishing someone but forgiving them for their mistakes"

The bench expressly stated that the said observation would be a guiding factor for the present case in the next hearing of the matter.

Case Details : IN RE: N. PEDDI RAJU AND ORS. Versus| SMC(C) No. 3/2025