The Allahabad High Court has framed criminal contempt charges against Krishna Kumar Pandey for allegedly posting a defamatory message on a lawyers’ WhatsApp group, accusing a sitting Additional District Judge of corruption and fabricating court orders.
A Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava held that Pandey’s actions prima facie amounted to scandalizing the judiciary and lowering the authority of the court, rejecting his preliminary objections and deciding to proceed with contempt charges under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Background
The case began after the Additional District Judge, Basti, reported that Pandey had circulated a WhatsApp message accusing him of taking bribes and writing fake orders, calling it a “crushing of law and Constitution.” The message went viral among advocates, prompting a formal reference to the High Court.
After reviewing the complaint, the Administrative Judge found the allegations contemptuous and damaging to the judiciary’s reputation. With approval from the Chief Justice, the matter was placed before the Division Bench.
Court’s Observations
Pandey argued that prior permission from the Advocate General was required before initiating contempt proceedings and that the matter should instead be handled through an “in-house” process for subordinate judges.
The Court firmly rejected both claims, clarifying that:
“There is absolutely no warrant under the law for seeking permission of the Advocate General… This Court can independently take cognizance of criminal contempt.”
It further stated that no “in-house procedure” exists for subordinate judges; complaints against them are handled through administrative or vigilance channels under the High Court’s control.
Interestingly, the Court noted that Pandey, though offered senior legal aid twice, refused assistance and is not a practicing advocate.
Charge and Next Steps
Finding sufficient evidence, the Court formally charged Pandey with criminal contempt for his WhatsApp post that “scandalised and lowered the authority of the court.” After the charge was read out, he pleaded not guilty and opted for a trial.
The Court has directed him to appear in person at the next hearing scheduled for October 9, 2025.
In essence, the High Court’s move sends a clear message — social media cannot be used as a platform to malign judges or erode public trust in the judiciary.
