Delhi High Court Sentences YouTuber Gulshan Pahuja to Six Months Jail for Criminal Contempt

New Delhi, May 2026 : The Delhi High Court has sentenced YouTuber Gulshan Pahuja, who runs the channel “Fight 4 Judicial Reforms”, to six months’ simple imprisonment in two criminal contempt cases for making derogatory and scandalous remarks against the judiciary and judicial officers.

A division bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja also imposed a fine of Rs 2,000 in each of the two contempt matters. The court observed that the contemnor had shown no remorse for his conduct and had instead aggravated the contempt by making further objectionable remarks against the judicial system during the course of the hearing.

However, the High Court suspended the sentence for 60 days to allow Pahuja to challenge the conviction and punishment before the Supreme Court.

Delivering the order, the Justice Navin Chawla-led Bench said that despite being given an opportunity to make submissions regarding the sentence, Pahuja questioned the conviction itself and continued making scandalous allegations against the courts during oral arguments.

“He, in fact, compounds his contempt by making further scandalous submissions before this Court and thus, evidently, he is neither repentant nor deserves any mercy,” the bench observed in its order.

The High Court also rejected Pahuja’s plea seeking recall of the earlier judgment that had convicted him for criminal contempt. The bench clarified that it could not review its own judgment in such proceedings and noted that the contemnor had the legal right to challenge the verdict before a higher court.

“As far as his submissions on our judgment dated 21.04.2026 are concerned, we cannot sit in review of the said judgment and the contemnor has full right and had an opportunity to challenge the same in accordance with law,” the court stated.

During the proceedings, the bench recorded several controversial remarks allegedly made by Pahuja against the judiciary. According to the order, he stated that “adaalaton ki manmarzi badhti jaa rahi hai aur main koi nyay ki umeed nahi kar raha,” implying that the “arbitrariness of courts is increasing” and that he had “no expectation of justice.”

He also allegedly described the functioning of courts as “taanashahi” or dictatorship, remarks which the court considered deeply scandalous and damaging to the dignity of the institution.

Advocate Harsh Prabhakar, who was appointed as amicus curiae in the matter, informed the court that Pahuja had shown “no course correction or remorse” despite repeated warnings and judicial directions. The amicus further submitted that the YouTuber continued uploading videos targeting judicial officers and the judiciary even after being restrained by the court.

Taking note of the contemnor’s conduct, the High Court observed that showing leniency in such cases could encourage similar behaviour and weaken public confidence in the justice delivery system.

“We also find that by not imposing adequate punishment on him, we may encourage him to repeat these acts in future and embolden him in doing the same. We are of the opinion that these cases call for the imposition of the maximum punishment,” the bench observed.

Accordingly, the court sentenced Pahuja to six months’ simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs 2,000 in each case. The bench directed that the sentences would run concurrently.

The court further ordered that in the event of default in payment of the fine, Pahuja would have to undergo an additional one month of simple imprisonment.

At the same time, considering his submission that he intended to challenge the verdict before the Supreme Court, the High Court suspended the operation of the sentence for 60 days.

“In case an order suspending the sentence is not passed by the Supreme Court, the contemnor shall on his own surrender before the Registrar General of this Court forthwith on expiry of the above-mentioned period,” the order stated.

The contempt proceedings stemmed from videos and online content uploaded on Pahuja’s YouTube channel, where he allegedly made sweeping and unverified allegations against judicial officers and the judiciary. In its earlier judgment, the High Court had held that such statements were intended to scandalise the institution and undermine public confidence in the justice system, and therefore did not enjoy protection under the constitutional right to free speech.

Team Maverick.