Introduction:

In a striking case that underscores the sanctity of judicial institutions and the consequences of undermining them, the Rajasthan High Court took suo motu cognizance of an incident involving the alleged desecration of a courtroom in a Gram Nyayalaya located in Bikaner. The matter arose from a formal reference dated March 10, 2026, submitted by the Presiding Judge of the Gram Nyayalaya to the High Court. The case, now before a Single Bench presided over by Justice Sandeep Shah, concerns the actions of three individuals who were alleged to have unlawfully entered the court premises during non-working hours and engaged in conduct that brought the dignity of the court into disrepute. According to the contents of the reference, two of the individuals were seen in a viral video sitting in the judge’s chair and standing in the witness box, while engaging in casual and inappropriate behavior, including playing songs and shaking hands, as if mimicking court proceedings. The video, which rapidly circulated across social media platforms, raised serious concerns about the erosion of respect for judicial institutions and the potential impact of such actions on public confidence in the justice system. Acting upon the reference, the High Court initiated criminal contempt proceedings against the respondents and issued notices, observing that the matter required serious judicial scrutiny. The Court also appointed Advocate Mahaveer Bishnoi as Amicus Curiae to assist in the proceedings, indicating the gravity and broader implications of the case.

Judgment:

At the current stage, the Rajasthan High Court has not delivered a final judgment but has taken significant preliminary steps that indicate its serious view of the matter. The issuance of notices for criminal contempt proceedings marks the formal initiation of judicial scrutiny into the conduct of the respondents.

Justice Sandeep Shah, presiding over the matter, observed that the incident, as reflected in the viral video and the reference made by the Gram Nyayalaya Judge, raises गंभीर concerns about the dignity and authority of the judiciary. The Court acknowledged that the actions of the respondents, if proven, could amount to a direct affront to the institution of justice.

The Court noted that the video clearly depicts one of the respondents sitting in the chair designated for the Presiding Officer, while another occupies the witness box—both positions that carry significant symbolic and functional importance in judicial proceedings. The casual behavior exhibited by the individuals, including playing music and engaging in gestures such as handshakes, was viewed as inconsistent with the decorum expected within a courtroom.

Recognizing the potential implications of such conduct, particularly in the context of its widespread circulation on social media, the Court held that the matter requires serious consideration. The viral nature of the video was seen as a factor that could amplify the impact of the incident, thereby necessitating judicial intervention.

Accordingly, the Court issued notices to all three respondents, directing them to explain their conduct and show cause as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them. This step ensures that the principles of natural justice are upheld, providing the respondents with an opportunity to present their defense.

The appointment of Advocate Mahaveer Bishnoi as Amicus Curiae reflects the Court’s intention to ensure a thorough and balanced examination of the issues involved. The Amicus is expected to assist the Court in analyzing the legal framework governing contempt, the factual matrix of the case, and the appropriate course of action.

While the final outcome of the case will depend on the responses of the respondents and the Court’s evaluation of the evidence, the present order serves as a strong reminder of the importance of maintaining the dignity and sanctity of judicial institutions. It underscores that any act, whether intentional or otherwise, that undermines the authority of the court will be dealt with seriously.

The proceedings also highlight the evolving challenges posed by social media, where actions that might once have remained localized can now gain widespread attention and impact. The Court’s proactive approach in addressing such conduct reflects its commitment to preserving public confidence in the justice system.