HP High Court Slams 'Paper Apology' in Suo Moto Contempt Case Over Facebook Video; Charges to Be Framed on July 16
Shimla, June 27, 2025:
In a no-nonsense move to uphold the dignity and majesty of law, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has come down hard on two individuals — Dhairya Sushant and another — for scandalizing the judiciary through a Facebook video, and later trying to wriggle out of the consequences with what the Court has called a “paper apology.”
The contempt case, taken up suo moto by the Court, is set for framing of charges on July 16, with both contemnors ordered to be present in person.
The criminal contempt petition (Cr.OPC No. 1 of 2025) was initiated after Respondent No.1 Dhairya Sushant uploaded a video on Facebook in which he not only criticized the judiciary in harsh, sweeping language, but also targeted a sitting judge of the High Court personally, accusing him of ignoring material evidence and alleging bias in proceedings.
“This is the height of the degradation of the judicial system… I explained to the judge orally and submitted it, but he did not take my statement on record,” the respondent is seen stating in the video, clips of which were submitted to the Court.
The Court, after reviewing the video transcript and material, observed that the accusations were not just disrespectful but aimed at scandalizing the Court and undermining public faith in the judiciary.
The Bench comprising Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sushil Kukreja noted that such remarks amounted to a wilful attack on the institution of justice, made in full public glare.
What followed was an attempted apology — but the Court refused to entertain it.
“This is nothing but a paper apology... a tactical move to escape the rigour of the law,” the judges said in a strongly-worded order.
The respondents had offered an apology in vague language, stating in their affidavit:
“...any of the words or gestures... which are contemptuous in the eyes of the Hon’ble Court... are hereby withdrawn.”
The Court was unimpressed. It pointed out that true apology must be “a full, frank, and manly confession”, not a legal escape route.
Citing landmark Supreme Court rulings including M.Y. Shareef, L.D. Jaikwal, Ashok Khot, and Priya Gupta, the Court emphasized that apologies in contempt cases must be timely, unconditional, and come from the heart, not the pen.
“We are sorry to say, we cannot subscribe to the ‘slap—say sorry—and forget’ school of thought,” the Bench quoted from earlier judgments. “Apology cannot be a cringing act of cowardice offered at the brink of punishment.”
The judgment also made it clear that such apologies should not become a precedent for letting contemnors go scot-free after attacking the dignity of courts. It warned that "compassion has no place when disobedience and disrespect are wilful and calculated."
Notably, the Court found that despite claiming to apologize, the respondents failed to acknowledge that their statements were indeed contemptuous, thus negating any sense of real remorse or repentance.
The case has sparked wide interest in legal and public discourse alike, especially as it involves the misuse of social media to question judicial conduct.
The Court has made it clear that while freedom of expression is sacrosanct, it does not extend to hurling reckless allegations at the judiciary.
“The law is very clear: the court should not get compassionate and dilute an indictment… punishment must follow.”
The matter will now be taken up on July 16, 2025, when formal charges will be framed. The message is loud and clear: “You can’t insult the court and walk away saying sorry.”
#ContemptOfCourt #JudicialDignity #HimachalHighCourt #SocialMediaLimits #FacebookControversy #PaperApologyWon’tWork #RuleOfLawPrevails