Skip to main content

"Who Do You Think You Are? Meet Me Outside": Convict, Lawyer Threaten Female Judge in Delhi Court After Guilty Verdict

In a shocking turn of events, a Delhi courtroom became the scene of chaos and intimidation after a convict and his lawyer launched a verbal attack on a woman judge who had just delivered a verdict in a cheque bounce case.

The incident, which unfolded before the bench of Judicial Magistrate Shivangi Mangla, has raised serious concerns about the safety and dignity of judicial officers across the country.

The case revolved around a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, pertaining to the dishonor of a cheque. Upon being convicted, the accused exploded in rage, reportedly telling the judge:

“Who even are you... meet me outside, and let’s see how you make it back home alive.”

According to the court’s order dated April 2, the convict even attempted to hurl an object at the judge and aggressively pressured his lawyer to manipulate the outcome in his favor.

The matter took an even more disturbing turn when the convict’s lawyer, Advocate Atul Kumar, allegedly joined in the harassment. Both the accused and his counsel are said to have verbally abused the judge, demanded her resignation, and threatened to file a false complaint to coerce her into reversing the judgment.

Unfazed by the intimidation, Magistrate Mangla has taken a firm stand. She has ordered that the accused’s conduct be reported to the National Commission for Women (NCW) and has stated unequivocally:

“Despite the intimidation, I remain committed to justice and will take necessary measures.”

The court has issued a show-cause notice to Advocate Atul Kumar, requiring him to explain his alleged misconduct and justify why criminal contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated. He has been directed to respond before the next date of hearing.

This disturbing episode is a stark reminder of the threats and pressure that members of the judiciary often face. Legal experts and citizens alike are calling for strong institutional safeguards and swift punitive action to uphold the independence and dignity of the courts.

The case is ongoing, and further developments are awaited.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Doctrine of Arbitrariness Under Article 14: Landmark E.P. Royappa vs. State of Tamil Nadu Case Explained

Introduction Equality is the cornerstone of the Indian Constitution, enshrined under Article 14 , which guarantees “equality before the law and equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.” This provision forms the foundation of India’s legal structure, ensuring fairness, non-discrimination, and uniformity in applying laws. The interpretation of Article 14 evolved significantly over time, especially with the landmark case of E.P. Royappa vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1974) , which introduced the Doctrine of Arbitrariness. This legal turning point  expanded the meaning of equality beyond mere classification. Understanding Article 14 – Right to Equality Article 14 of the Constitution of India states: “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.” This provision ensures that all individuals, irrespective of race, religion, caste, gender, or place of birth, are treated equally under the...
Post a Comment
Read more

R v. Dudley and Stephens (1884): A Landmark Case on Necessity Defense

Introduction The 1884 case of R v. Dudley and Stephens (14 QBD 273) is one of the most pivotal rulings in English criminal law, specifically regarding the Defense of Necessity in murder cases . This landmark judgment established the legal precedent that necessity cannot be invoked as a defense for murder , even in dire, life-threatening circumstances. Case Background: Survival at Sea In July 1884, Thomas Dudley, Edward Stephens, Brooks, and Richard Parker (a 17-year-old cabin boy) were left adrift after their yacht, Mignonette , sank. For over 20 days, the men survived on limited resources, including turnips and a turtle they managed to catch. As the situation worsened and Parker became gravely weak, Dudley and Stephens resolved to kill and consume Parker in order to survive. Although Brooks abstained from participating in Parker's death, he later consumed Parker's flesh. On the 24th day, the survivors were rescued by a passing ship. Upon their return to England, Dudley and St...
Post a Comment
Read more

Coalgate Scam (2014) – Supreme Court’s Verdict on Coal Block Allocations in India

Overview of the Coalgate Scam The Coalgate Scam , officially known as the Coal Allocation Scam , is one of India’s biggest corruption controversies. It involved the irregular allocation of coal blocks by the Indian government to private companies without competitive bidding between 2004 and 2009 , during the tenure of the UPA government . The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) estimated a potential loss of ₹1.86 lakh crore to the public exchequer, due to the non-transparent and arbitrary allocation of coal-rich blocks to select firms. What Was the Coal Allocation Scam About? Coal blocks are parcels of coal-rich land given to companies for mining. Between 2004–2009 , the government allocated over 200 coal blocks to private companies using a discretionary allotment method . No public auction was held, leading to unjust enrichment of certain private entities. Many companies that received coal blocks had little or no prior experience in coal mining . Supreme C...
Post a Comment
Read more