Top Court Seeks State’s Reply on Contempt Conviction for Circulating Derogatory Letter
The Supreme Court of India has stayed a contempt conviction passed by the Bombay High Court against a Navi Mumbai resident who had circulated a controversial letter accusing judges of being part of a so-called “dog mafia.” The top court’s interim relief halts the woman’s one-week jail sentence and a fine of ₹2,000 imposed by the High Court.
The case stems from a circular dated January 29, issued by Vineeta Srinandan, then cultural head of Seawoods Estates Limited, amidst a dispute in her housing society concerning stray dog feeding rules. In her letter addressed to over 1,500 residents, she alleged that stray dog feeders were being shielded by the judiciary, writing:
“Now we are convinced that there is a big Dog mafia operating in the country, who has a list of High Court and Supreme Court judges having views similar to the dog feeders.”
The Bombay High Court took strong objection to the language used in the circular, initiating suo motu criminal contempt proceedings. In its April 23 order, the court observed:
“It cannot be believed that when the contemnor undertook such contumacious writing, she was not conscious or could be said to be unaware of the consequences.”
The court found Srinandan’s apology to be lacking in sincerity, stating:
“Such apology, in our opinion, is merely a weapon in defence with an impression that the contemnor can get away by such recitals.”
Holding the remarks as scandalous and damaging to the integrity of the judiciary, the High Court sentenced her to one week in jail and a ₹2,000 fine.
However, on April 24, a Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and KV Viswanathan granted a stay on the execution of the sentence, pending further proceedings. The Bench also sought a response from the State of Maharashtra on Srinandan’s appeal challenging her conviction.
Srinandan was represented by Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, with a legal team comprising Advocates Yash S. Vijay, Pranjal Agarwal, Dixita Gohil, Kms Sivani, Anisha Mahajan, Deepak Sharma, and Shikhar Aggarwal.
The matter is part of a larger legal conflict within the Seawoods housing society related to the implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, which allow designated feeding of stray dogs. The circular in question came to light when a fellow resident, Leela Verma, submitted it in court while challenging restrictions on her right to feed stray dogs.
The Supreme Court’s stay now puts the High Court’s punishment on hold until it adjudicates on the merits of Srinandan’s appeal.
Case: Vineeta Srinandan vs High Court of Judicature at Bombay – Available on LAWFYI.IO
