Contempt of court case:Advocate Devesh Bhatt

Ahmedabad: Advocate Devesh Bhatt, who faces 12 cases for contempt of court, appeared before a division bench of the Gujarat high court on Monday. The court contemplated the seizure of his property through revenue authority in wake of nonexecution of non-bailable warrant issued against him.
The bench of Justice D H Waghela and Justice K A Puj thought of initiating procedure of seizure of the lawyer’s property in the next proceeding, which is scheduled later this week, said advocate Asim Pandya, who has been appointed amicus curie in this case.
Even after HC order of April 19 for nonbailable warrant against him, advocate Devesh Bhatt on April 22 dashed off a letter to the registrar general of the Gujarat high court reminding him of complaints made earlier by him against four judges, including Chief Justice S J Mukhopadhaya.
Advocate Bhatt has been issuing legal notices to judicial officers for quite some time in cases where court ruling were not in his clients’ favour. He has also filed damage suit against certain judicial officers demanding amount up to Rs 1 crore. In his letter to the high court, the lawyer claimed that he has been following this procedure under the guidance of the Union of India, which has advised him to take appropriate action through judicial process for redressal against judges.
The lawyer reminded the court authority of four different letters written to the President of India to direct the Gujarat governor to grant permission to prosecute the high court judges for alleged inaction under section 166 of IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
In his letter to the high court, the lawyer stated, “We have been now advised by Under Secretary to Government of India...that he is directed to advise us that it will be in order for us to seek redressal against these judges through judicial process. He, however, observed that for any judicial action, the judges are protected under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985.” Advocate Bhatt is still trying to confirm with the under secretary whether he got such direction from competent authority.
Meanwhile, the lawyer has decided not to stop here, as he has expressed his desire in this letter stating, “We intend to file criminal cases, suits and necessary applications under the Contempt of Courts Act on receipt of confirmation from him (under secretary).”