Bombay HC begins contempt action against lawyer for his “defamatory allegations” against sitting, former judges

Bombay High Court orders YouTube and ABP Majha to remove defamatory video, initiates contempt proceedings against advocate Nilesh Ojha.

A five-judge Bench of the Bombay High Court on Tuesday (April 8, 2025) directed YouTube and Marathi television news channel ABP Majha to immediately take down a video of advocate Nilesh Ojha that is allegedly “scandalous and defamatory” against a sitting judge and a former Chief Justice of the High Court.  

The Court said that it initiated suo motu (on its own) contempt proceedings against Mr. Ojha because it found that the advocate had made “scandalous” allegations against sitting High Court judge Justice Revati Mohite Dere and former Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyay on April 1, in videos recorded during a press conference related to a petition filed by Satish Salian, seeking a fresh probe into the June 2020 death of his daughter Disha Salian.

He made the allegations a day before the matter was listed for hearing on April 2, before Justice Dere. When the matter was called out for hearing, the advocate said that his petition was wrongly placed before the Bench and that it should be heard by a Bench headed by Justice Sarang Kotwal. The High Court noted that the petition pertains to the assignment of the Bench headed by Justice Sarang Kotwal and ordered the court’s registry to take steps to place the matter before that Bench.

The larger Bench, comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe, Justices A.S. Chandurkar, M.S. Sonak, Ravindra Ghughe and A.S. Gadkari, pointed out on Tuesday that if the advocate and his client had reservations over the sitting judge, then they could have raised it the same day.  

The Bench found his statements highly problematic, and said, “Considering the scandalous nature of the video, YouTube and ABP Majha are directed to taken down the video forthwith. They are restricted from recreating, recirculating, re-uploading or in any manner publicising the video during the pendency of the contempt petition. The statements in the press conference appear to have been made deliberately to scandalise the authority of this court and also a sitting judge. The act of publishing interviews amounts to scandalising the court and defamatory. Such allegations tend to lower the image of the court. The manner in which the statement has made certainly amounts to contempt. The statement is ex-facie contemptuous and is an interference in administration of justice.” 

The Bench called the statements made at the press conference “ex-facie contemptuous” and noted, “The statements prima facie constitutes criminal contempt. He was under obligation to make submissions seeking to recuse the judge. However, instead of making a submission on April 2, Mr. Ojha held a press conference on April 1. We, therefore, direct the registry to issue show-cause notice to Mr. Ojha, made returnable on April 29.”  

The court also directed the registry to issue a formal notice to the Bar Council of India, Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, Bombay Bar Associated, Advocates Association of Western India, YouTube, and ABP Majha as respondents in the case.