Supreme Court Refuses To Reduce Lawyer's Sentence For Abusing Woman Judge, Says...
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court today rejected a petition by a lawyer convicted of abusing a woman judicial officer in a court in Delhi.
The top court refused to reduce the imprisonment sentence to 6 months and said, "Today, the majority of our officers in Delhi are women. They will not be able to function if somebody can get away like this. Think of their state," the bench commented orally.
The bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice Manmohan was hearing a plea against the order of the Delhi High Court, which upheld the conviction of a lawyer who used abusive language towards a woman judge in a challan matter inside the trial court.
The lawyer used abusive, vulgar expletives after the judge had adjourned the matter.
While hearing the plea, Justice Manmohan verbally remarked, "Just see the inspection report, the language used, we cannot even say in the open court". Justice Manmohan further said that if a stern view is not taken against such behaviour, women judicial officers would not be ensured a safe work environment.
"Today, the majority of our officers in Delhi are women. They will not be able to function like this- if somebody can get away like this. Think of their state," the bench said.
The lawyer, Sanjay Rathore, was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment for the offence under Section 509 (intending to outrage modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code, 3 months under Section 189 (injury to public servant), and an additional three months under Section 353 (assault or criminal force against public servant to deter them from their duty).
The trial court directed that the sentences would run consecutively, resulting in a total sentence of two years. Later, the High Court said that the sentence would run concurrently and not consecutively, reducing his sentence to 18 months from two years
The counsel for the petitioner urged the Supreme Court bench to reduce his term of imprisonment to six months. He stressed several "mitigating factors" for this consideration, like his ageing parents and young children. He informed that the Bar Council has also acted against the lawyer.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
15 minutes ago
- India Today
10% Maratha reservation to continue this year, hearing on fresh pleas from July 18
The Maratha reservation issue will once again come under judicial scrutiny, with a newly constituted full bench of the Bombay High Court set to begin hearings on fresh pleas from July 18. However, the 10 per cent reservation in education and government jobs given to the Maratha community will continue this bench, comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge, NJ Jamadar and Sandeep Marne, announced on Wednesday that they would devote half-days, full working days and even some Saturdays - ordinarily court holidays - to complete the hearing hearing pertains to challenges against the Maharashtra State Reservation for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) Act, 2024, which grants 10 per cent reservation in education and government jobs to the Maratha community. Under this order, any admission or job appointment made under the SEBC Act remains subject to final court directions. The matter was previously heard by a bench led by then-Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya. However, proceedings halted after his transfer to the Delhi High Court in January. Following this, some students approached the Supreme Court, citing harm to their admission prospects due to the ongoing legal uncertainty. The top court subsequently directed the Bombay High Court to constitute a new full bench, which has now taken Wednesday's hearing, senior advocate Pradeep Sancheti, representing the petitioners, urged the bench to expedite proceedings as the academic admission cycle was underway. He argued that, unlike job appointments, delayed admissions would be harder to rectify, even with the interim order in General Dr Birendra Saraf, appearing for the Maharashtra government, said the state needed more time to respond to the latest petition filed in court. He maintained that the interim order provided adequate safeguards and questioned the urgency shown by the petitioners. He also suggested that the petitioners withdraw the new plea if they were unwilling to allow time for the state to considering the submissions, the bench scheduled the hearing for five weeks SEBC Act, passed on February 20 last year by the Eknath Shinde-led Maharashtra government, followed recommendations by the Maharashtra State Backward Class Commission (MSBCC) led by retired Justice Sunil Shukre. The commission had concluded that "exceptional circumstances and extraordinary situations" warranted reservation for the Maratha community beyond the 50 per cent cap mandated by the Supreme legislation, which came just ahead of the Lok Sabha and assembly elections, sparked a series of public interest litigations and petitions challenging its constitutional validity. Simultaneously, numerous intervention applications have been filed by Maratha organisations defending the reservation and opposing the addition to the reservation issue, petitions have also been filed questioning the legality of Justice Shukre's appointment as chairperson of the Watch
India Gazette
an hour ago
- India Gazette
SC seeks HC's response on lady judge's plea over 'demoralising' remarks in performance report after CCL request
New Delhi [India], June 11 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notices to the Jharkhand High Court and the State government, seeking their responses to a plea filed by a lady judge who sought removal of certain remarks made in her annual performance report. The petitioner, a single parent and a District and Additional Sessions Judge in Dumka, Jharkhand alleged that following her request for 194 days of Child Care Leave (CCL), certain 'painful and demoralising' remarks were made in her Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for the assessment year 2023-2024 issued by the Vigilance Registrar of the High Court. After hearing the matter today, a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan directed the respondent HC and the State, to file their responses to the lady judge's plea within four weeks time and listed the matter for further hearing in the first week of August. The judge had initially approached the Supreme Court after the High Court rejected her CCL request seeking 194 days of leave. The apex court then directed the High Court to reconsider the matter, following which she was granted 94 days of leave, by the High Court. During the hearing on Wednesday, the Supreme Court was informed of a fresh grievance with regard to certain negative remarks made in her ACR. In her application, the judge submitted that while the remarks were stated to be 'suggestive' and non-adverse, they were demoralising and have caused her mental agony. As per the lady judge's plea she has had an impeccable career record of having disposed of huge number of cases. Thus, she sought that the said remarks in her ACR report be expunged. After hearing submissions, the top-court directed the High Court and the State government to file their responses within four weeks and posted the matter to be heard next in the first week of August. Advocate Anup Kumar is representing the petitioner judge. (ANI)
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
OBC quota deadlock dominates politics in West Bengal; new list an appeasement move, says BJP
The deadlock over the Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation continues to dominate politics in West Bengal with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leadership accusing the State government of 'appeasement politics' on Wednesday, a day after Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said that'backwardness'wasthe only benchmark to decide OBC categories. Addressing the State Assembly while tabling the annual report of the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes for the financial year 2024-25,the Chief Minister had said on Tuesday that a commission set up by the government is holding a survey on 50 new subsections for inclusion in the category. The Calcutta High Court in May 2024 had struck down the OBC reservation awarded to 77 categories, highlighting a complete lack of legislative policy within the 2012 scheme to classify any group as OBC. The matter is pending before the Supreme Court. On March 19, 2025, the State government told the Supreme Court that it would complete the fresh OBC survey within three months. Since the fresh list of OBC reservation is not available, the admission to colleges in the State has not started almost a month after results of Higher Secondary Examinations have been declared. The State government on Tuesday also tabled in the Assembly an interim report on the new OBC list for reservations. 'One-sided benefits' Reacting to the developments, Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari took to social media and said, 'If this reservation list is not prepared with the intention of providing 'one-sided benefits' exclusively to Muslims, by deliberately depriving Hindus and other communities, then the sun rises in the west.' Meanwhile, State Education Minister Bratya Basu has assured that there will be no disruption in the academic calender due to the OBC reservation list.
