Rehan Khan
On 12th March, the Delhi High Court directed Advocate Shivanshu Gunwal to extend pro bono legal assistance in at least two cases pending before the Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO), Saket. This directive came as a condition for accepting his apology in a contempt of court matter initiated against him.
The contempt proceedings arose from an incident dated November 23, 2024, during a trial at the Saket Court. Gunwal, who was representing an accused person charged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), allegedly exhibited aggressive and disruptive behaviour in the courtroom. It was alleged that he raised his voice, pointed fingers at the judge, and openly questioned the Court’s authority, despite several warnings to refrain from such conduct. His actions reportedly caused disruption in the proceedings and delayed the trial.
According to the Trial Court’s record, the advocate made remarks like “You tell me the law” and “Why don’t you convict the accused now itself”. Even after withdrawing his vakalatnama, he continued to remain in the courtroom with his associates, allegedly creating an intimidating environment. He also purportedly threatened to file a complaint against the presiding judge.
Taking cognizance of the incident, the High Court initiated contempt proceedings against Gunwal. During the hearing, the advocate appeared in person before the High Court and submitted an unconditional apology, both to the Court and the presiding judge of the Trial Court. He clarified that the episode was an isolated incident in his legal career spanning over two decades and assured the Court that such conduct would not be repeated.
A Division-Bench comprising of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta presided over the matter. While the Bench accepted Gunwal’s apology, it emphasised the necessity for legal professionals to maintain decorum and respect within courtroom proceedings.
“There can be no doubt unnecessary aggression and raising of voice in court, which demonstrates disrespect, cannot be tolerated. Lawyers must uphold the dignity of the judicial process,” the Bench remarked.
Consequently, the Court imposed a condition requiring Gunwal to render pro bono services in a minimum of two cases before the POCSO court. The presiding judge of the court—Ms. Ankita Lal, Additional Sessions Judge (SC POCSO), South East District, Saket—will determine the specific cases.
The Court’s order, passed on March 12, 2025, reads:
“The Respondent shall, however, render pro bono services to at least two accused/victims in the Court of Ld. ASJ (SC POCSO) South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, as may be decided by the Ld. PO, Ms. Ankita Lal. For this purpose, the present order be communicated to the concerned Presiding Officer, who shall appoint the Respondent for rendering pro bono service in the Court in at least two matters.”
With this directive, the High Court disposed of the contempt case.
Case Name: Court On Its Own Motion v. Shivashish Gunwal Advocate
Case Number: CONT.CAS.(CRL) 2/2025
Bench: Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta