Delhi High Court in the case observed and stated that the dignity of courts does not come from what people have to say about the judiciary but the dignity comes from the duties the courts discharge, while discharging the filmmaker Vivek Agnihotri in a contempt case.
The bench headed by Justice Siddharth Mridul in the case observed that during the hearing of the contempt case that the Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi in the case contempt while rendering a decisions court do not punish for contempt for securing their dignity. Thus, the said dignity does not come from what people have to say. Thus, our dignity comes from the work and the duties we discharge.
Therefore, the Agnihotri was also being present before the bench comprising of Justice Mridul and Justice Vikas Mahajan in the case observed and has reiterated his remorse. Therefore, it has also been stated by Agnihotri that he has the utmost respect for the institution of judiciary and that the same did not intend to wilfully offend the majesty of the said court.
Adding to it, the court also stated that the matter was kept pending only in order to make it clear that statements cannot be made irresponsibly. Thus, the case is not adversarial.
The bench of Justice Mridul stated that in fact of the classic case is where it has been commented by someone about the House of Lords that they being are old idiots to which Lord Templeman very famously said that insofar as the first expression is being concerned and this court that I am old; in so far as the expression fool is concerned, this court disagrees with you and it does not amount to contempt. Thus, our dignity is founded on stronger foundations and our dignity is not because somebody says something.
It has also been observed by the judge that the Lawyers say something about us every time they leave the courtroom, if we are to start prosecuting you for that there will never be any end for it.