NCLT Kolkata Issues Criminal Contempt Notice to Insolvency Professional for Appearing in Vest During Virtual Hearing
Sangeetha Prathap
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Kolkata Bench has issued a criminal contempt show-cause notice to insolvency professional Subrato Ghosh after he appeared during a virtual insolvency hearing wearing only a vest/baniyan. The incident took place in proceedings initiated by SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. against Samsara Energy Ltd., where Ghosh joined the video conference in an undergarment while the matter was being taken up for hearing. The Bench comprising Judicial Member Labh Singh and Technical Member Rekha Kantilal Shah recorded its displeasure and held that the conduct amounted to an intentional insult to the Tribunal in the presence of women Members of the Bench, staff and bar.
The Tribunal emphasised that young lawyers, most of whom are women, regularly appear before the court and that such behaviour in a judicial proceeding displayed total disregard for professional ethics and courtroom decorum. Observing that Ghosh was well aware of the decorum expected from insolvency professionals and court officers, the Bench stated that appearing in an undergarment was not a mistake or lapse of etiquette but a deliberate act intended to lower the authority of the Tribunal. It noted that the liberty of virtual appearance cannot be used to abuse the dignity of judicial forums.
Referring to Section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Bench held that the conduct clearly fell within the definition of criminal contempt as it scandalised and lowered the authority of the court. The Tribunal further invoked Section 425 of the Companies Act, 2013, which grants the NCLT and NCLAT the same contempt jurisdiction as a High Court. It reiterated that the Tribunal is not powerless to act when the dignity of the Bench is compromised and cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in R. K. Garg v. State of Himachal Pradesh to underline that misuse of virtual mode by appearing in an undergarment amounts to an abuse of judicial process.
The Bench remarked that it has a constitutional duty to maintain courtroom decorum and that violations of professional ethics and cultured conduct, if tolerated, would erode the system without which no democracy could survive. It warned that such conduct sets a dangerous precedent and is incompatible with the standards expected of insolvency professionals, who are officers of the court and integral participants in judicial proceedings.
In view of the seriousness of the misconduct, the Tribunal directed Ghosh to explain why criminal contempt proceedings under Section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act should not be initiated against him and why the matter should not be referred to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) for disciplinary action. He has been ordered to file his reply to the show-cause notice by the next date of hearing.
Appearance
For Applicant: Advocates Sankarsan Sarkar, Aditya Kanodia,Tanmoy Sett, Suparna Sardar, Pratik Dutta
For Corporate Debtor: Advocates Rishad Medora, Abhirup Chakraborty, Priyanka Mitra
Cause Title: SREI Equipment Finance Ltd vs Samsara Energy Ltd
Case No: CP(IB)/10/KB/2025
Coram: Judicial Member Labh Singh, Technical Member Rekha Kantilal Shah
