In a notable move emphasising the judiciary’s vigilance over its authority, the Allahabad High Court has formally framed charges under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, against Krishna Kumar Pandey for circulating a WhatsApp message accusing a judicial officer of corruption and fabricating order sheets. The Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava observed that a prima facie case for criminal contempt exists, emphasizing the deliberate attempt to scandalize the judiciary.
The case arose in July 2023, when Krishna Kumar Pandey, who is not a practicing lawyer, posted a message in a WhatsApp group of advocates from District Basti. The judicial officer, at whose instance the reference was made, reported the act, stating that the message had circulated widely and constituted “a calculated attempt to deliberately scandalise and lower the authority of the court.” In response, a contempt proceeding was registered against Pandey in 2024.
Pandey had challenged the proceedings, arguing that prior permission from the Advocate General was required and that the matter should be referred to the Chief Justice under an in-house inquiry procedure. The High Court rejected both contentions, stating, “There is absolutely no mechanism of an in-house procedure for inquiring complaints against Judges of the Subordinate Courts. Rather, Judges of the District Courts are subject to the disciplinary control of this Court. In case a complaint is laid against them, it is inquired into in the first instance administratively, and then, in a vigilance inquiry. Thereafter, if material is found, formal disciplinary proceedings are drawn against the learned Judge.”
“No law has been shown to us for the existence of such an in-house procedure", added the Court. The Court detailed that Pandey’s message accused the presiding judge of accepting bribes, fabricating order sheets, and manipulating multiple cases, thereby “committed an act which scandalises and lowers the authority of the Court of the Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court-I, Basti by bringing the Court to disrepute on account of the insinuations made … and thereby committed criminal contempt of Court punishable under Section 12 read with Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”
Throughout the pre-charge proceedings, Pandey declined legal representation, asserting he was competent to defend himself. The High Court, through the Legal Services Committee, offered senior counsel, but he repeatedly refused, prompting the Court to proceed with framing charges based on the evidence and procedural record.
The Court also took cognizance of the role of local bar associations, issuing notices to multiple associations in Basti to ascertain Pandey’s access to advocacy WhatsApp groups. The associations denied any involvement, clarifying that the contemnor was not their member and that corrective measures would be implemented to restrict such social media participation to practicing lawyers only.
A formal charge has now been served, and Pandey has pleaded not guilty, claiming trial. The matter is scheduled for hearing on October 9, 2025, at 2:00 p.m., with the contemnor required to remain present in person.
Case Title: In Re. Vs. Krishna Kumar Pandey
Case No: Contempt Application (Criminal) No. - 14 Of 2024
Coram: Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava, Justice J.J. Munir
Advocate for Appellant: Advs. Gaurav Kumar Shukla, Rakesh Pathak, Sudhir Mehrotra
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Ashok Kumar Yadav
Picture Source :
