Spread the love
Allahabad High Court Issues Contempt Notice To An Advocate Accused Of Stalking, Sending Obnoxious Messages To A Lady Judge


An advocate has been given a show-cause notice by the Allahabad High Court, requesting that he explain why criminal contempt charges should not be brought against him for allegedly stalking, sending offensive and upsetting messages, and making lewd comments about a female judge on her Facebook page.

The bail granted by the district court to the accused/contemnor-advocate on the basis of a motion made by the lady judge herself was revoked by a single judge of the High Court over a month prior to the passing of the order.

A woman judicial officer who was serving as a Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate in the same District made allegations against one Abhay Pratap, an advocate who practises in the Maharajganj court, alleging that he began sending her offensive messages and that he also made certain remarks through messages on the applicant’s Facebook account.

He began visiting the court of the judicial officer after the concerned officer barred the contemnor, and he would sit in her court doing nothing but staring at her.

She eventually found it difficult to focus on her work and complete the tasks given to her, so she had no choice but to file a first information report against him. He was subsequently arrested and charged with violating Sections 186, 228, 352, 353, 354, 354-D, 506, and 509 of the IPC as well as Section 67 of the I.T. Act.

He was so detained on November 23, 2022, but the Sessions Judge released him on bail on December 17, 2022. The victim moved to the High Court to request the cancellation of the bail after contesting the bail ruling.

Last month, the HC accepted the plea and ordered the court’s registry to present the case to the proper bench for suo moto recognition of the criminal contempt committed.

A division bench made up of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Vinod Diwakar took up the case suo moto in response to the single judge’s order and determined that the contemnor’s actions prima facie constituted criminal contempt as defined in section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

HARDIK SHARMA, B.COM LL.B


0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *