New Delhi, Apr 20 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday permitted a whistleblower to approach the Madhya Pradesh High Court to seek a hearing in ongoing suo motu criminal contempt proceedings initiated against a BJP MLA accused of attempting to contact a sitting high court judge.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi allowed petitioner Ashutosh Dixit, represented by Devadatt Kamat, to withdraw his plea, granting him liberty to move the high court to assist in the pending contempt proceedings.
The matter stems from a petition filed by Dixit before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, alleging illegal and excessive mining by three companies purportedly linked to BJP MLA Sanjay Satyendra Pathak.
During the hearing of that petition, Justice Vishal Mishra recused himself after noting that the legislator had allegedly attempted to contact him regarding the case.
In his recusal order, Justice Mishra recorded that he was “not inclined to entertain the writ petition” after the alleged attempt by the MLA to initiate a discussion.
Subsequently, Dixit filed a fresh petition seeking action against the legislator.
On April 3, a division bench of the high court took cognisance of the matter and initiated criminal contempt proceedings suo motu, while disposing of Dixit’s petition.
Dixit, however, challenged the high court’s order before the Supreme Court, contending that his plea had been disposed of without consideration of additional reliefs, including a request for investigation.
Kamat, appearing for Dixit, said that the alleged conduct of a sitting MLA contacting a judge warranted serious action. He also expressed concern that the contempt proceedings could be diluted if the legislator tendered an apology.
The bench, however, observed that the high court had already taken cognisance of the issue.
During the hearing, the CJI cautioned against making political statements in court, emphasizing that litigants cannot dictate how courts should proceed.
“Do not make political statements. We do not appreciate it…you cannot dictate what the court should do,” he said, adding at one stage that the petition appeared motivated by unmet “political mileage”.
If the alleged act had indeed taken place, it must be addressed in accordance with due legal process, the CJI said, adding, “If someone has done this action, they must be taken to task”. PTI SJK ABA SJK KVK KVK
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.