SC issues contempt notice over allegations against Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya

New Delhi: In an extraordinary escalation within India’s judiciary, the Supreme Court has intervened in a brewing confrontation at the Telangana High Court, issuing contempt notices to an advocate and litigant for making grave accusations against Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya.

The action comes amid a sustained boycott by hundreds of lawyers, who have accused the judge—recently transferred from Calcutta—of excessive penalisation, discourtesy to junior advocates, and an alleged disregard for non-English-speaking lawyers. The top court, however, has called the allegations an attack on judicial independence.

What happened?

The Supreme Court issued contempt notices to an advocate and a litigant for levelling serious allegations against Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya of the Telangana High Court. The apex court called the remarks “scurrilous” and said such attacks undermine judicial integrity.

Chief Justice of India, Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai said: "The judiciary cannot allow judges to be unfairly targeted or subjected to baseless allegations. While our intent was to safeguard lawyers, such conduct against judicial officers cannot be tolerated.”

What triggered the controversy?

According to reports, over 300 advocates at the Telangana High Court began boycotting Justice Bhattacharya’s courtroom, accusing her of humiliation, excessive imposition of fines, and insensitivity to junior lawyers and those not fluent in English. The Telangana High Court Advocates Association (THCAA) passed a resolution demanding her transfer.

What are some specific cases cited?

• ₹3 lakh fine on HDFC in a settled accident matter
• ₹25,000 fine on a daily wage worker in a habeas corpus plea
• ₹10,000 cost for a lawyer’s alleged "offensive tone"
• ₹20,000 penalty for a procedural lapse in filing

What did the Supreme Court say?

A bench led by Justice B R Gavai, citing concerns raised by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, said the judiciary cannot allow such allegations to go unchecked. “We were trying to protect lawyers,” said the court, but added that allowing baseless accusations threatens judicial independence.

Justice K Chandru, former Madras High Court judge, noted that such resistance often emerges when judges come from outside a state and enforce discipline. He cited Section 35B of the Civil Procedure Code, which empowers courts to impose costs for delays or non-compliance.

What happens next?

The boycott by advocates is ongoing

THCAA plans to write to the President and CJI

The Supreme Court will proceed with contempt hearings

Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya was transferred from the Calcutta High Court to Telangana in March 2024. The ongoing row highlights deep-rooted tensions between assertive judges and local bar associations.