The Delhi High Court has sentenced YouTuber and advocate Gulshan Pahuja to six months’ simple imprisonment in two criminal contempt cases for making derogatory remarks against the judiciary through videos posted on his YouTube channel.
A division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Ravinder Dudeja imposed the maximum punishment, observing that Pahuja had shown “no regret” and continued making scandalous comments even during court proceedings.
The case relates to videos uploaded on Pahuja’s YouTube channel, Fight 4 Judicial Reforms, where he interviewed advocates and allegedly made comments targeting judges and courts.
Court Objected to Remarks Comparing Judiciary to ‘Dictatorship’
During the hearing on sentencing, the court noted that Pahuja repeated controversial remarks about the judicial system and claimed he did not expect justice from Indian courts.
According to the order, Pahuja said, “Adaalaton ki manmarzi badhti jaa rahi hai aur main koi nyay ki umeed nahi kar raha” (the arbitrary actions of courts are increasing and I am not expecting justice). He also remarked that “manmarzi ka dusra arth taanashahi hota hai” (arbitrariness is another word for dictatorship).
The bench said these statements further aggravated the contempt.
“The contemnor shows no regret for the same. He also does not suggest any course correction,” the court observed. It added that Pahuja “compounds his contempt by making further scandalous submissions before this Court.”
Two Lawyers Given Relief After Apology
The contempt proceedings began after three judicial officers flagged videos in which advocates Shiv Narayan Sharma and Deepak Singh allegedly made objectionable remarks against judges during interviews conducted by Pahuja.
However, both lawyers later offered unconditional apologies, saying they had not agreed to the interviews being uploaded online and were unaware of objectionable thumbnails and banners attached to the videos.
The High Court accepted their apologies and dropped contempt proceedings against them.
Sentence Suspended for 60 Days to Allow Appeal
The High Court said a lighter punishment could encourage similar conduct in the future.
“We may encourage him to repeat these acts in future and embolden him in doing the same” if adequate punishment was not imposed, the bench said.
Along with six months’ imprisonment, the court also imposed a fine of ₹2,000 in each contempt case. The sentences will run concurrently.
However, since Pahuja informed the court that he plans to challenge the verdict before the Supreme Court, the High Court suspended the sentence for 60 days under the Contempt of Courts Act, giving him time to file an appeal.
The case is titled Court on Its Own Motion v. Shiv Narayan Sharma Adv. and Ors. / Deepak Singh, Advocate and Anr.
