The Bombay High Court has directed a police inquiry into an alleged attempt to frame Justice Madhav Jamdar, following repeated calls made to his wife by a lawyer expressing urgent interest in purchasing their jointly owned Mumbai flat.

Justice Jamdar, in an order dated April 29, revealed that advocate Partho Sarkar contacted his wife multiple times between April 22 and April 24, 2025, as well as once in October 2023, regarding the property listed online.

Notably, the calls came shortly after the Court had directed the Bar Council to initiate proceedings against another advocate, Vijay Kurle, who had sought adjournment on the day of judgment in a separate case.

Sarkar is said to be closely associated with Kurle.

"In light of the above, a senior police official or the Senior Police Inspector, Malabar Hill Police Station, Mumbai, is directed to conduct an inquiry into these phone calls and submit a report to the Registrar General of this Court," the Court stated in its order.

Justice Jamdar said he personally spoke with Sarkar on April 24, after which he grew suspicious due to the advocate's unnatural laughter during their exchange. Despite being informed that he was speaking to a sitting High Court judge, Sarkar failed to reveal his own identity as a lawyer.

Subsequent review of his wife's phone confirmed that the caller’s WhatsApp profile matched that of advocate Sarkar. A missed call from Sarkar the next day only deepened the judge's suspicions.

The Court noted that the timing of these calls appears to be linked to its April 9 order directing an inquiry into Kurle's alleged misconduct. It also took into account the conduct of advocate Mathews Nedumpara, another associate of Kurle.

On April 17, Nedumpara reportedly accused the Court of insulting him by asking him to be seated, stating he was “not a slave of the Court” before leaving the courtroom without permission. He was later summoned back by court staff.

Justice Jamdar highlighted this episode as an attempt to “browbeat” and “humiliate” the Court, possibly in retaliation for its April 9 order against Kurle.

"The conduct of Mr. Nedumpara, following the order passed on April 9, appears prima facie aimed at tarnishing the image of this Court and amounts to contempt," the judge observed.

The Court concluded that the sequence of events suggests a deliberate attempt to target the bench for taking action against Kurle and his associates.

"It is evident that an attempt is being made to frame this Court in retaliation to its order against Mr. Vijay Kurle," the order stated, while also recommending that the matter be placed before the Chief Justice for reassignment to another bench.

The State of Maharashtra was represented by Public Prosecutor HS Venegavkar and Additional Public Prosecutor AS Gotad. Advocate Subhash Jha appeared for Mathews Nedumpara, while advocates Nicky Pokar and Ghanshyam Upadhyay represented Partho Sarkar.