The Supreme Court has exercised its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to indefinitely keep in abeyance the criminal contempt conviction and sentence imposed on senior advocate Yatin Oza, describing the relief as a “final act of forgiveness” while making it clear that the Gujarat High Court’s findings did not warrant interference.
The case stemmed from remarks made by Oza, then President of the Gujarat High Court Advocates’ Association, during a 2020 press conference amid the COVID-19 pandemic, where he criticised the functioning of the Gujarat High Court registry and referred to the High Court as a “gambling den,” alleging preferential treatment for influential litigants. The Gujarat High Court had initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings, convicted him, and sentenced him till the rising of the court along with a fine.
A Bench led by Justice J.K. Maheshwari noted that Oza’s remarks were indefensible and that the High Court’s reasoning in holding him guilty of criminal contempt did not call for judicial interference. However, considering the larger circumstances, the Court chose to extend exceptional relief.
The Court took note of Oza’s repeated unconditional apologies before both the High Court and the Supreme Court, his expression of remorse, and the context in which the statements were made during the first COVID-19 wave, when junior advocates were facing severe professional and financial hardship and complaints regarding listing of matters were being raised before him as Bar Association president.
The Court also considered that Oza had already suffered substantial professional consequences, including the loss of his senior advocate designation for over 17 months, resulting in professional hardship, social embarrassment, and personal agony.
Importantly, the Supreme Court clarified that while the conviction remains, it shall remain in abeyance indefinitely, meaning no statutory disqualification or disadvantage will flow from it, including under Section 24A of the Advocates Act.
The Court further directed the Gujarat High Court Full Court to periodically review Oza’s conduct every two years. If he engages in similar misconduct in future, the High Court would be at liberty to approach the Supreme Court for immediate activation of the conviction and sentence.
On the separate issue of the 2024 incident concerning Oza’s conduct and the question of withdrawal of his senior designation, the Supreme Court directed the Gujarat High Court to take a fresh decision uninfluenced by the contempt conviction in the present case.
Stressing that this was a one-time indulgence, the Court said it expected Oza’s conduct to remain above board and in strict conformity with the undertaking given before it.
