A statement along the lines of: "Arré saheb kai toh sharam rakho (Oh sir, have some shame)” before sitting Justice Devan Desai during a hearing on July 7, 2023 resulted in suo motu contempt proceedings under Article 215 of the Constitution of India and provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act against lawyer Percy Kavina for allegedly using "unparliamentary and disparaging language.” The proceedings, however, were closed following Kavina’s unconditional apology on affidavit before the Gujarat High Court.
Speaking to Parsiana on August 8, the senior counsel told us that "technically, no notice of contempt was issued.” In the order, the divisional bench had taken cognizance of the statement and requested the registrar-judicial of the court to give a report. That report quoted Kavina’s opponent who said it was done in the heat of the moment. Kavina stated to Parsiana that he told them that if the remark was intemperate, he was willing to apologize.
The Ahmedabad Mirror reported on July 14 that the division bench of Justices A. S. Supehia and M. R. Mengedey had initiated the proceedings. The division bench recorded that Kavina had tendered an unconditional apology to Justice Desai and had also "tendered an earnest and sincere unconditional apology” before the division bench hearing the contempt proceedings by way of an affidavit. The bench accepted Kavina’s apologies.
"The Court also observed that any act that is ‘deleterious’ to the majesty of the institute cannot be accepted even if it has occurred at the spur of the moment. However, noting that (Kavina) extended earnest and unconditional apology not just before the division bench but also before the single judge, the Court deemed it fit to not stretch this matter any further,” reported legal website livelaw.com.
Kavina had represented Goolrookh Gupta pro bono in the Gujarat High Court in her matter against the Valsad Parsi Anjuman resolution barring entry to the local agiary and Doongerwadi to Parsi women married to non-Parsis, even if they have had a civil marriage and continued to practice the Zoroastrian faith. The matter is before the Supreme Court.