"‘Scurrilous Attack on Judiciary Cannot Go Unpunished’: Bombay High Court Convicts Director for Criminal Contempt and Sentences Her to One Week’s Imprisonment"
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Maharashtra Division Bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Advait M. Sethna has held the contemnor guilty of criminal contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Court found that the contemnor issued a written circular containing scurrilous, scandalizing, and defamatory remarks aimed at the judiciary, which were calculated to undermine public confidence in the justice system and disrupt the administration of justice.
The court imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000 and issued a warrant directing Ms. Srinandan to surrender to the Officer-in-Charge of the Bombay High Court Police Station. While the court initially suspended execution of the sentence for 10 days, it categorically rejected the apology rendered by the contemnor, terming it a "white wash" devoid of genuine remorse.
The proceedings arose suo motu from derogatory written communications issued by Ms. Vineeta Srinandan, circulated in a residential colony during the pendency of Writ Petition No. 11652 of 2023, filed by Seawoods Estates Limited. The publication in question was titled "How Democracy is being crushed by Judicial System?" and was issued on 29 January 2025.
The court noted that the circular alleged a nexus between a so-called "dog feeder mafia" and members of the judiciary, making allegations such as: "There is a big Dog mafia operating in the country, who has a list of High Court and Supreme Court judges having views similar to the dog feeders."
It further stated: "Most of the high court/supreme court orders will defend dog feeders ignoring the value of human life."
The allegations were brought to the court’s attention by an intervenor, Ms. Leela Verma, who filed an affidavit during related proceedings, indicating that the communications issued by the contemnor were "of a highly derogatory nature and completely undermining the esteem dignity of the Court."
The High Court initially issued show cause notice to the contemnor on 7 February 2025 after observing that: "We have not the slightest of doubt that looking at the nature of the communications...contempt proceedings are required to be initiated against its author Mrs. Vineeta Srinandan."
Subsequently, Seawoods Estates Limited, through its authorized representative Mr. Alok Agarwal, filed an affidavit disowning the circular and distancing the Board of Directors from the actions of Ms. Srinandan. The affidavit stated:
"The circular and/or its contents were never discussed or approved or accepted by any of the Board members and... was a case of poor, reckless, ill-considered, unintended, impulsive, and mistaken choice of words..."
The court accepted the Board's apology and declined to proceed against Seawoods or its directors, observing on 21 February 2025: "We are of the opinion that the apology as tendered by the Board of Directors in the affidavit filed by Mr. Alok Agarwal, is required to be accepted."
However, the contemnor's individual affidavit, dated 18 February 2025, was met with stern criticism. Despite acknowledging the circulation of the document and expressing regret, the court noted: "The contemnor’s statements do not appear to be any compunction on her conscious acts...it appears to be more of a white wash and/or borrowed sentiment."
The court's reasoning rested on a detailed interpretation of Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, which defines criminal contempt as including any act which "scandalises or tends to scandalise, or lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court."
The bench stated: "It is not expected from an educated person like that of the contemnor to make such comments in regard to the Courts and the Judges...shows a dedicated attempt...to bring the Court and the Judges to a disrepute..."
The judgment also cited Supreme Court precedent, including Rajendra Sail v. M.P. High Court Bar Association, reiterating that: "Confidence which the people repose in the courts of justice, cannot be allowed to be tarnished, diminished and or wiped out by the contemptuous behaviour of any person."
The court rejected the apology offered by the contemnor, citing Justice Thakkar's words from L. D. Jaikwal v. State of U.P.: "We are sorry to say we cannot subscribe to the 'slap-say sorry-and-forget' school of thought in administration of contempt jurisprudence."
In conclusion, the court remarked: "We do not accept any apology, which does not show any contrition or any genuine remorse...Such apology...is merely a weapon in defence with an impression that the contemnor can get away by such recitals."
The court issued the following directives:
- The contemnor Ms. Vineeta Srinandan is held guilty of having committed criminal Contempt of Court and accordingly stands convicted under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
- Vineeta Srinandan is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one week with a fine of Rs.2,000/-.
- Vineeta Srinandan shall surrender herself to the Officer-in-Charge of the Bombay High Court Police Station.
- Warrant be issued accordingly.
The execution of the sentence was suspended for a period of 10 days from the date of the order.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Mr. Amjith M. Anandhan a/w Mr. Pranjal Agarwal, Ms. Dixita Gohil, Mr. Ujjawal Pratap, and Mr. Rounak Burad i/b Ms. Sandhya Yadav; Ms. S.V. Sonawane a/w Mr. Satish Muley, Mr. Mosin Naik, and Mr. Zhoaib Sayyed; Ms. Neha Bhide, GP a/w Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP.
For the Respondents: Mr. Y.S. Bhate a/w Mr. D.P. Singh i/b Mr. A.A. Ansari; Mr. Ankit Ojha a/w Mr. R.K. Dubey; Ms. Manisha Shekhar Jagtap; Mr. Tejesh Dande.
For the Contemnor/Show Cause Noticee: Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Ativ Patel, Mr. Viloma Shah, Mr. Harshad Vyas i/b AVP Partners for Mrs. Vineeta Srinandan
Case Title: High Court of Judicature at Bombay on its own motion vs. Mrs. Vineeta Srinandan
Neutral Citation: 2025: BHC-AS:18189-DB
Case Number: Suo Motu Criminal Contempt Petition No. 2 of 2025
Bench: Justice G. S. Kulkarni, Justice Advait M. Sethna
[Read/Download order]
