27.08.2026 Item No.03 Court No.01 KCP CRLCP 4 of 2026 Suo Motu Criminal Contempt - Versus - Firdous Samim Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Sr. Adv., Mr. Partha Sarathi Sengupta, Sr. Adv., Mr. Joydeep Kar, Sr. Adv., Mr. Soumya Majumder, Sr. Adv., Mr. Kallol Basu, Sr. Adv., Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Uday Sankar Chatterjee, Mr. Pintu Karar, Ms. Gopa Biswas, Mr. Hasanuz Zaman Molla, Mr. Mainak Ghosal, Ms. Salini Bhattacharya, Mr. Md. Imzamamul Islam, Mr. Ayush Majumder, Mr. Rajosik Dutta, Ms. Brinta Dutta, Mr. Naman Shah, Mr. Asik Mondal, Ms. Noorani Sultana …for the alleged contemnor Mr. Surajit Nath Mitra, Ld. A.G., Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharyya, Ld. A.A.G., Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra, Ld. A.G.P., Mr. Anish Kumar Mukherjee. …for the State Records would reveal that the alleged contemnor resorted to scandalous and unparliamentary remarks while participating in a hearing before an Hon’ble Judge on 23rd July, 2026. He attempted to threaten, overawe, and browbeat the Court using disrespectful language. As such abominable conduct is most unbecoming of an advocate, this Court took suo motu cognizance of the incident and issued show 2 cause notice to the advocate on 30th July, 2026. Thereafter, on 12th August, 2026, the learned advocate appearing for the alleged contemnor apologized and prayed for leave to file an affidavit and to place on record a written undertaking that such act would not be repeated. In view thereof, the Court adjourned the matter observing that considering such affidavit, this Court would decide as to whether a contempt rule needs to be issued. Pursuant to the earlier direction, the alleged contemnor has filed an affidavit on 25th August, 2026 stating that appearing personally before the Hon’ble Single Judge on 12th August, 2026, when the proceedings were being live streamed, he had tendered unqualified apology. In the affidavit, he has also put on record a written undertaking that such an incident would not be repeated ever. Mr. Mitra, learned senior advocate, assisted by Mr. Sengupta, learned senior advocate and Mr. Kar, learned senior advocate, appears on behalf of the alleged contemnor and submits that it had never been the intent of the advocate to undermine the majesty of the Court and that he had tendered unqualified apology. The same is not questionable in sincerity and is tempered with a sense of genuine 3 remorse and repentance. He humbly prays for acceptance of such apology. The task at our hands is unpleasant. It concerns the action of an advocate practicing in this Court, which is perilously close to destroying the discipline and dignity of the Court. We are aware that this Court has to exercise caution and restraint when initiating contempt proceedings. However, any leniency or liberal attitude shown to the alleged contemnor by this Court cannot be taken as a license for indulging in indecorous behaviour. Certain grim circumstances, as noted in the orders, had spurred this Court to embark upon a rather unpleasant task of initiating criminal contempt proceeding against a member of its own Bar. Legal profession is widely considered to be one of the most ancient and honourable of all callings. Despite being burdened with onerous expectations, lawyers must rise to the occasion and conduct themselves with a high degree of refinement. Considering that any rule issued upon the contemnor would have a cascading and ruinous effect upon his profession and may adversely affect his future as a practitioner in this Hon’ble Court, we accept the apology tendered and restrain ourselves 4 from issuing any suo motu rule of contempt against him. The contemnor shall, however, be mindful in future. In the event he fails to maintain the expected standards, no leniency shall be shown to him. The undertaking submitted shall serve as a strict deterrent against any repeat misconduct. It is made clear that any violation of such undertaking would be dealt with zero tolerance and severity. With the above observations, the criminal contempt application is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties. (Atarup Banerjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, A.C.J.)