The Delhi High Court has sentenced YouTuber Gulshan Pahuja to six months’ simple imprisonment in criminal contempt proceedings, holding that his repeated scandalous attacks on the judiciary including remarks equating judicial “manmarzi” with “taanashahi” (dictatorship) amounted to criminal contempt warranting the maximum punishment under law. The Court also imposed a fine of ₹2,000 in each of the two contempt cases.
A Division Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja held that Pahuja had not only scandalised the court and lowered its authority through his earlier conduct, but had compounded the contempt during the sentencing hearing itself by making further derogatory remarks against the judicial system.
The Court recorded that during oral submissions, Pahuja stated that he expected no justice from the Indian judicial system and made remarks suggesting increasing judicial arbitrariness and “dictatorship.” The Bench observed that these statements demonstrated complete absence of remorse.
Rejecting his plea to revisit the earlier judgment holding him guilty of contempt, the Court held that sentencing proceedings could not be converted into a review of the conviction order. It noted that if he wished to challenge the finding of guilt, he had an independent remedy in accordance with law.
The Bench noted that Pahuja maintained that his actions were intended to improve the judicial system, but found that he had shown no regret, no course correction, and no indication that such conduct would cease.
The Court also took note of submissions by the Amicus Curiae that despite an earlier restraint order passed in May 2025 directing him not to upload further videos making allegations against judicial officers, Pahuja had allegedly continued such conduct.
Holding that a mere fine would be inadequate, the Court observed that failure to impose meaningful punishment could embolden repetition of similar conduct in future.
Accordingly, the Bench imposed the maximum punishment of six months’ simple imprisonment, with sentences in both matters to run concurrently. In default of payment of fine, an additional one month’s imprisonment has been directed.
However, since Pahuja indicated his intention to challenge both the conviction and sentencing before the Supreme Court, the High Court exercised powers under Section 19(3) of the Contempt of Courts Act and suspended the sentence for 60 days to enable him to pursue appellate remedies.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner: Mr.Harsh Prabhakar, Adv. (Amicus Curiae) with Mr.Dhruv Chaudhry, Mr. Shubham Sourav and Mr. Vijit Singh, Advs.
Mr. Vivek Kumar Tandon, Adv. (DHCLSC) with Ms. Laxmi Gupta, Adv
For Respondent: Mr.Gulshan Pahuja, R-2 present in person.
Mr. Aman Usman, APP with Mr. Manvendra Yadav, Adv for the State.
