Supreme Court Refuses to Stay Contempt Proceedings Against Advocate for Press Conference Allegations

The Supreme Court declined to interfere with criminal contempt proceedings against Advocate Nilesh Ojha for making unsubstantiated allegations against a sitting Bombay HC judge during a press conference. 

The Bench observed that while judicial scrutiny is essential, personal imputations against judges must rest on "unimpeachable evidence" and be pursued through legal remedies rather than public commentary.

Holding that taking a pending judicial controversy to the public domain to sensationalize or scandalize the institution is inconsistent with professional ethics.

The High Court had initiated suo motu action after the advocate alleged bias and conflict of interest without filing for formal recusal.

[Nilesh C Ojha v. High Court of Judicature at Bombay]