New Delhi: In a shocking display of contempt for judicial authority, the Supreme Court of India has come down heavily on a Uttar Pradesh police officer who allegedly defied its protective order and brazenly declared he would “not obey any Supreme Court order” and would “get the entire High Court and Supreme Court removed.”
The case, which has sent shockwaves through India’s law enforcement and judicial circles, involves Gulaab Singh Sonkar, Station House Officer (SHO) of Kandhai Police Station in Pratapgarh district, who stands accused of willfully violating Supreme Court directives and assaulting a petitioner despite clear judicial protection.
Background of the Controversial Case of SHO Gulaab Singh Sonkar
The contempt petition stems from a series of events that began in March 2025. The Supreme Court had issued a protective order on March 28, 2025, explicitly directing that no coercive measures or actions be taken against the petitioner, Ram Sagar Tiwari.
However, on April 23, 2025, despite the apex court’s explicit protection, the petitioner was allegedly forcibly dragged from his workplace, arrested, and physically assaulted by SHO Gulaab Singh Sonkar.
What makes this case particularly grave is the SHO’s alleged response when the petitioner presented a copy of the Supreme Court’s order.
According to the complaint, the officer responded in Hindi with shocking arrogance: “Main kisi Supreme Court ka aadesh nahin manunga, mai tumhara sara High Court aur Supreme Court nikal dunga aaj” (I will not obey the order of any Supreme Court; I will get your entire High Court and Supreme Court removed today).
Supreme Court’s Scathing Observations
A bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice NV Anjaria heard the contempt petition and expressed deep concern over the blatant defiance of judicial authority.
The bench made several hard-hitting observations that underscore the severity of the officer’s actions:
“Prima facie, there is willful disobedience of the Order of the Court by the first respondent, which requires to be dealt with iron hands and cannot be condoned under the guise of the police uniform.”
The Court further noted that the officer’s conduct had “polluted the stream of justice” and that such behavior undermines public trust in the judicial system.
Independent Investigation Against SHO Gulaab Singh Sonkar Confirms Willful Disobedience
Following the initial complaint, the Supreme Court had directed the Uttar Pradesh Home Department to conduct an independent investigation through an officer not below the rank of Additional Director General of Police (ADGP).
The inquiry report, submitted to the Court, substantiated the allegations of intentional disobedience by the SHO. The Government’s investigation confirmed that there was indeed willful violation of the Supreme Court’s protective order dated March 28, 2025.
What the Law Says About Contempt of Court
The legal framework governing contempt proceedings in India is comprehensively laid down under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, along with Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India.
Article 129 empowers the Supreme Court to act as a court of record and punish for its own contempt, while Article 215 grants similar powers to every High Court.
The Contempt of Courts Act defines two types of contempt:
Civil Contempt (Section 2(b)): Willful disobedience of any judgment, decree, order, writ, or direction of a court, or a deliberate breach of an undertaking given to the court.
Criminal Contempt (Section 2(c)): Any act or publication that scandalizes or lowers the authority of the court, prejudices judicial proceedings, or obstructs the administration of justice.
According to Section 12 of the Act, the punishment for contempt may include simple imprisonment up to six months, a fine up to Rs. 2,000, or both.
State Government Assures Swift Action Against SHO Gulaab Singh Sonkar
While the Supreme Court was inclined to impose strict punitive measures against the SHO, the Additional Advocate General (AAG), appearing for the Principal Secretary, Department of Home & Confidential, Government of Uttar Pradesh, assured the Court that immediate action would be taken based on the inquiry findings.
The AAG submitted that in light of the inquiry report, the State Government would act immediately and apprise the Court of the action taken by the next date of hearing.
The Court, accepting the Government’s assurance, granted a limited timeframe for compliance and scheduled the matter for hearing on November 7, 2025, directing the State to report on the actions taken against the erring officer.
The order stated:
“At this juncture, the learned AAG appearing for respondent no.2 Principal Secretary, Department of Home & Confidential, Government of Uttar Pradesh has submitted that in light of the inquiry report, the State Government will act immediately and apprise this Court of the action taken by the next date of hearing. For this purpose, accommodation is sought. Re-list this matter on 07.11.2025.”
Who is Justice Aravind Kumar
Justice Aravind Kumar, who is heading the bench hearing this significant case, has had a remarkable judicial career spanning decades. He obtained his law degree from Bangalore University and was an active student union leader, serving as Vice President of Bangalore University Students Action Committee.
Legal Practice:
Justice Kumar enrolled as an advocate in 1987 and practiced before Trial Courts, Civil Courts, Magistrate Courts, and Appellate Tribunals for initial years. In 1990, he shifted his practice to the Karnataka High Court. He was appointed as Additional Standing Counsel for the Union government at Karnataka High Court in 1999.
Elevation to Judiciary:
– Appointed as Additional Judge of Karnataka High Court on June 26, 2009
– Made Permanent Judge on December 7, 2012
– Appointed as 27th Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court on October 13, 2021
– Elevated to Supreme Court on February 13, 2023
Notable Contributions: During his tenure as Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court, Justice Kumar initiated the “Signal Schools” program, converting roadway buses into classrooms for underprivileged children. He also disposed of 175 cases pending for more than 30 years in just 87 days, demonstrating his commitment to judicial efficiency.
Justice Kumar was the founder member and Vice-President of Lahari Advocates Forum, an organization promoting legal education and training for young advocates. He also served as Special Public Prosecutor for CBI before his elevation.
Who is Justice NV Anjaria
Justice Nilay Vipinchandra Anjaria, the other member of the bench, has equally impressive credentials.
He graduated with an LL.B degree from Sir L.A. Shah Law College in 1988 and pursued his Master’s in law from the University of Ahmedabad School of Law.
Judicial Career:
– Elevated as Additional Judge of Gujarat High Court on November 21, 2011
– Became permanent judge on September 6, 2013
– Appointed as Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court on February 25, 2025
– Elevated to Supreme Court in May 2025
Landmark Judgments: Justice Anjaria has authored several significant judgments addressing public health, medical education, and social justice issues. His rulings have consistently emphasized that fundamental rights must be balanced with public welfare and constitutional directives.
Implications for Police Accountability
This case has far-reaching implications for police accountability and respect for judicial authority in India. Legal experts view this as a landmark case that reinforces the principle that no one, regardless of their position, is above the law.
Read Also: Cricket Champion, Police Officer, Nation’s Pride — The Extraordinary Story of DSP Deepti Sharma
The Supreme Court’s strong stance sends a clear message to law enforcement agencies across the country that defiance of court orders will not be tolerated and will be dealt with severely.
Senior advocates have noted that this case underscores the importance of the judiciary’s role as the guardian of constitutional values and individual rights, especially when citizens seek protection from coercive state action.
Public Reaction and Concerns
The case has generated significant public discourse about police excesses and the need for accountability in law enforcement. Civil society organizations have welcomed the Supreme Court’s firm stance, calling it essential for maintaining the rule of law.
Legal activists have pointed out that such incidents highlight the urgent need for comprehensive police reforms and better training in constitutional values and respect for judicial authority.
Way Forward
The matter is scheduled for hearing on November 7, 2025, when the Uttar Pradesh government is expected to report on the disciplinary action taken against SHO Gulaab Singh Sonkar.
Legal experts anticipate that based on the inquiry report’s findings and the gravity of the offense, the state government may initiate departmental proceedings against the officer, which could include suspension, termination, or other punitive measures.
Additionally, the Supreme Court retains the power to impose its own punishment for contempt, which could include imprisonment and fine, depending on the severity of the established violations.
