Delhi High Court Accepted Engineer’s Apology for Calling Delhi Judiciary Abusive and Corrupt

The man who was having a disagreement, according to the court, was experiencing “sheer frustration and depression” at the time of the allegations.

The Delhi High Court declared that the Delhi judiciary as a whole was corrupt and closed the criminal contempt of court case against a mechanical engineer who had spoken disparagingly about a judge.

The division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Shalinder Kaur stated that the accusations made by engineer Brijesh Shukla against the judge and the judiciary appeared to be the result of “sheer frustration and depression.”

Shukla’s contempt case was started in 2019 after he filed an email complaint alleging judicial officer misuse of power with the Vigilance Committee for judicial officers. In the complaint, he also used derogatory language against the judge.

According to the court’s records, Shukla had complained on multiple occasions about being taken advantage of by the banks. He also claimed that the judicial officer was hearing “fakes cases” against him with the intention of obtaining his foreign payment.

Additionally, it discovered that Shukla had explicitly claimed that the Delhi judiciary was dishonest and engaged in money laundering in his response to the contempt proceedings.

Shukla said he was a mechanical engineering graduate who went to Fiji for work but did not receive his due compensation in response to a question from the court.

The Court was informed that he was also embroiled in a legal battle with a company named Angelique International Ltd concerning his payment from the Fijian government.

Shukla added that his losses from 2012 to 2022 contributed to his depression.

He sought an unconditional apology from the amicus curiae assigned to defend him after speaking with them. He also clarified that he had not hired legal representation and was unaware that such accusations could result in contempt of court.

The Court released Shukla from the contempt proceedings after taking this into consideration.

“He tenders an unconditional apology for making such comment and remorse to this effect and undertakes before this Court that he shall be careful in future,” the ruling stated.

[Court on Its Own Motion v. Brijesh Shukla]

Leave a Comment