Bombay HC begins contempt proceedings against advocate Nilesh Ojha.
Case linked to remarks on Justice Revati Mohite Dere in Salian petition.
Court orders reply in four weeks; hearing fixed for 16 October.
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday initiated a second suo motu criminal contempt proceeding against advocate Nilesh Ojha for allegedly making disparaging and defamatory statements against Justice Revati Mohite Dere, a sitting judge of the court.
A five-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justices M.S. Sonak, Ravindra Ghughe, A.S. Gadkari, and B.P. Colabawalla directed Ojha to file a written statement within four weeks explaining why formal charges should not be framed under the Contempt of Courts Act. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 16 October, PTI reported.
According to PTI, the Bench observed that Ojha’s remarks went beyond fair criticism and appeared aimed at undermining the judge’s credibility and integrity. The court noted that the statements were intended to embarrass Justice Dere and deter her from performing judicial duties.
The judges pointed out that Ojha had used terms such as “forgery, bias, discriminatory conduct, dishonesty, and conspiracy,” which were defamatory and capable of eroding public confidence in the judiciary. They also clarified that in suo motu contempt proceedings, the judge who brings the matter to the court’s attention cannot be impleaded as a respondent.
The case stems from a press conference held by Ojha on 1 April 2025 in connection with a petition filed by Satish Salian seeking a fresh probe into the 2020 death of his daughter, Disha Salian. At the press conference, Ojha accused Justice Dere and former Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyay of corruption and conflict of interest, and claimed that Justice Dere was unfit to hear the matter due to alleged political links.
Following the press conference, the High Court directed YouTube and Marathi news channel ABP Majha to remove videos containing Ojha’s statements. The court described the material as scandalous and defamatory, adding that publishing such content amounted to scandalising the authority of the court and interfering with the administration of justice, PTI reported.
The Bench also cautioned the 15 advocates representing Ojha to remain mindful of their professional obligations. It stressed that conduct acceptable in society may not be permissible for members of the Bar, and that attacks on judicial integrity could create public distrust and harm the reputation of sitting judges.
(With inputs from PTI)
