The Supreme Court order banning the posting of clips of court proceedings on social media is in gross violation of the very freedom of speech and expression, and the order will bind none.
1.Whatever happens from the seat of justice, people have a right to know. Video recording of court proceedings, live streaming, preservation of such records, and access to such records by lawyers, litigants, and the public at large are essential ingredients of the very right to freedom of speech and expression, the most precious of all […]
Real time access to court proceedings is the need of the day, and so long as the Court does not provide it, the lawyers and litigants are justified to record the proceedings of their own. Courts have no power to create new heads of penal offences, and the threat of the Registry is wholly ill-conceived, illegal and unconstitutional. (Read my reply to the notice of the Registry of the Bombay High Court requiring me to take down the video of the court proceedings uploaded on my YouTube)
MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARAAdvocate101, Gundecha Chambers, Nagindas Master Rd, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400001Mob: +91 98205 35428/94471 65651E-mail: mathewsjnedumpara@gmail.com13.5.2026To,The Central Project Coordinator,High Court of Bombay(Mr.Ganesh Deshmukh)High Court of Bombay, Appellate Side,Mumbai Sir,Ref: Your letter dated 28th March 2026 which was emailed to me on 6th May 2026 whereby you called upon me to take down […]
Real time access to court proceedings is the need of the day, and so long as the Court does not provide it, the lawyers and litigants are justified to record the proceedings of their own. Courts have no power to create new heads of penal offences, and the threat of the Registry is wholly ill-conceived, illegal and unconstitutional. (Read my reply to the notice of the Registry of the Bombay High Court requiring me to take down the video of the court proceedings uploaded on my YouTube)
MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARAAdvocate101, Gundecha Chambers, Nagindas Master Rd, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400001Mob: +91 98205 35428/94471 65651E-mail: mathewsjnedumpara@gmail.com13.5.2026To,The Central Project Coordinator,High Court of Bombay(Mr.Ganesh Deshmukh)High Court of Bombay, Appellate Side,Mumbai Sir,Ref: Your letter dated 28th March 2026 which was emailed to me on 6th May 2026 whereby you called upon me to take down […]
Bar Council of India Circular on Social Media: A Grave Threat to the Freedom of Speech of the Bar
Mathews J. Nedumpara20th July 202698205 35428 Bar Council of India Circular on Social Media: A Grave Threat to the Freedom of Speech of the Bar I was shocked to come across the Bar Council of India’s Circular dated 17.07.2026, captioned “Maintenance of Dignity, Restraint and Professional Ethics in the Use of Social Media by Advocates, […]
Contempt of Court is a cathartic jurisdiction which belongs to the dark ages. Contrary to the elementary principles of jurisprudence, in Contempt of Court, the accuser and the adjudicator is the court itself. In civil law countries, there is no Contempt of Court jurisprudence. Contempt of Court by scandalisation became obsolete even in England by the end of the 19th century. Unfortunately, our founding fathers allowed the concept of Contempt of Court to continue in free India. It is high time we erased the draconian law of contempt from our statutes, and in particular, Contempt of Court by scandalisation. Read my Writ Petition of 2016 challenging the constitutional validity of the Contempt of Courts Act.
Sub: To declare that the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is unconstitutional and void, or at least Sections 2(c)(i), 14, 16 and 17(5) thereof IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN ITS EXTRA-ORDINARY ORIGINAL JURISDICTION W. P.(C) NO. 14564OF 2016 Mathews J. Nedumpara … Petitioner Union of India & Ors. … Respondents MEMORANDUM OF WRIT […]
If you are a common man and invoke Article 226 of the Bombay High Court, denial of justice is a fait accompli.
If you file a suit it will be decided on merits, no matter whether you engage a kith and kin of judges or otherwise favoured, or engage an ordinary lawyer. On the contrary, if you institute a Writ Petition in a High Court, for instance in the Bombay High Court, its fate largely depends upon […]
Open Letter to the CJI — Maria Nedumpara’s Grievance Against Justice Shyam Suman of the Bombay High Court for Mistreatment Without Rhyme or Reason
MARIA NEDUMPARAAdvocate101, Gundecha Chambers, Nagindas Master Rd, Kala Ghoda, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400001Mob: +91 9447165650 E-mail: marianedumpara@gmail.com To,Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. R. Gavai,The Chief Justice of India,Supreme Court, Tilak Marg,New Delhi-110001 Also to,Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shree ChandrashekharThe Chief Justice,High Court of Judicature at BombayMumbai – 400032 May it please your Lordship, Sub: Grievance concerning mistreatment […]
The Bench headed by Justice Dipankar Datta dismissed my Writ Petition under Article 32 seeking registration of an FIR and a just and fair investigation into the incident of huge volumes of burnt cash found at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma, on the ground that I had not produced, along with the writ petition, my representation seeking investigation, which indeed was produced as Ann. P5 at page 118 of the writ petition. I filed an Application for Review on 16.8.2025. The same is yet to be heard. All review petitions are dismissed in Chambers without any hearing, entirely behind the back of the parties.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAINHERENT JURISDICTIONREVIEW PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2025INWRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 706 OF 2025 (Against the final impugned judgment dated 07.08.2025 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 706 of 2025) IN THE MATTER OF:MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA & ORS. PETITIONERSVERSUSTHE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTSWITHI.A. NO. […]
If Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma of NCLAT, Chennai, was approached by “one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary of this country” — which was what Justice Sharma had said in the open court, apparently for KLSR Infratech Ltd — mere recusal is not the answer; the so-called revered judge of the “higher judiciary” is liable to be proceeded against for contempt of court; otherwise there is no rule of law in this country.
Mathews J. Nedumpara98205 3542826th August 2025 To Respected Sir(s), We, lawyers and citizens, are taken aback by the order of the NCLAT, Chennai Bench dated 13.08.2025, wherein the Bench recorded: “One of us (Member Judicial) has been approached by one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary of this country for seeking an […]
Why does my call for essential, multi-pronged judicial reform remain a voice in the wilderness? Why do good men remain silent?
Mathews J Nedumpara30th March 2026