The Delhi High Court has initiated criminal contempt of court proceedings against advocate Rakesh Kumar for allegedly shouting at and threatening a trial judge in open court. The matter, listed as Court on its own Motion Vs Rakesh Kumar, Advocate, was taken up by a Division Bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja. The Bench passed two orders on August 20, 2026, seeking the advocate’s response and directing further steps in the proceedings.
The contempt proceedings were triggered by a reference from District Judge MK Nagpal of the Tis Hazari Courts in Delhi. The trial judge reported two distinct incidents involving the advocate’s conduct during court proceedings.
The first incident allegedly occurred on April 3, 2025. According to the judge’s account, the advocate raised his voice, accused the judge of acting in a biased manner, and claimed that judges did not work properly. He further threatened to file RTI applications to uncover the judge’s past records. During the exchange, the advocate reportedly stated that he did not become a lawyer to perform ‘chamchagiri’ (sycophancy) for judges. He also remarked that since his salary was funded by taxpayers’ money, he was not doing anyone any favours, and questioned whether the judge could then engage in ‘dadagiri’ (bullying) in court.
The second incident is said to have taken place on April 16, 2025, after a case in which the advocate was appearing was listed on an incorrect date. Dissatisfied with the response received when this issue was raised, the advocate allegedly raised his voice at the trial judge and demanded a written apology. The judge quoted the advocate as saying in court: ‘Mere ko ‘Sorry’ chahiye written main. Jo Ahlmad ne ye galti kari hain. Date to kisine bhi kari ho sir sign to aapne kiya tha na sir. Sign aapne kiya to judge sahab aapko bhi to ek baar dekh lena chahiye. Kyo nahi bola sir [sorry], jab ham galti kare to sorry bole, we are standing on the same footing. Aap bhi sorry boliye, aapne to sorry nahi bola, hamae to kehte ho aap ki sorry bol do. Sir galti huyi na, galti ke liye sorry bolega ya nahi bolega [for reader].’
The High Court observed that despite repeated attempts by the judge to explain that the court official responsible for the scheduling error would be asked to provide an explanation, the advocate persisted in his demand for a written apology from the Court itself. The Bench noted that the advocate’s conduct occurred in full view of those present in the open court, including during virtual proceedings, and that he failed to show any respect to the court.
In framing the charge of criminal contempt, the Court stated: ‘By the above act, which was committed in the open court through the virtual platform and in full view of those present, you have lowered the authority of the Court and attempted to interfere with the due course of judicial proceedings and the administration of justice, thereby committing criminal contempt.’ The advocate has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The Court has directed advocate Rakesh Kumar to file his response to the contempt notice. It has also called for the CCTV recording of the trial court proceedings during which the alleged contemptuous remarks were made. Furthermore, the Court has directed the advocate to be personally present at the next date of hearing, scheduled for October 15, 2026. On the last date of hearing, advocate Rakesh Kumar appeared in person, while advocate Amit George assisted the Court as amicus curiae.