Allahabad High Court
Princess Mahi @ Saher Naqvi vs Pradipti Singh Special Chief Judicial ... on 15 October, 2024
Author: Salil Kumar Rai
Bench: Salil Kumar Rai
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:163273 Court No. - 1 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 6435 of 2024 Applicant :- Princess Mahi @ Saher Naqvi Opposite Party :- Pradipti Singh Special Chief Judicial Magistrate Prayagraj Counsel for Applicant :- Saher Naqvi Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.
The present application has been filed pleading willful disobedience of the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by this Court in Application U/S 482 No.18674 of 2022 whereby this Court had quashed the proceedings in Criminal Case No.420 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.930 of 2019 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 506 I.P.C.
In pursuance to the order dated 15.12.2023, the proceedings in Criminal Case No.420 of 2022 were closed and the case was consigned by order dated 1.2.2024.
The allegation of the applicant is that despite the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by this Court and the consequential order dated 1.2.2024 passed by the trial court, the opposite party i.e., the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj has re-started the proceedings in Criminal Case No.420 of 2022 on an application filed by the complainant. In support of her contention, the applicant who was appeared in person in this Court has annexed a copy of the order sheet of Criminal Case No.420 of 2022.
It has been argued that the act of the opposite party in starting the proceedings in Criminal Case No.420 of 2022 is willful disobedience of the order dated 15.12.2023 for which the opposite party is liable to be prosecuted and punished in contempt.
The documents on record do not support the contention of the applicant. It appears from a reading of the order dated 15.12.2023 that as a consequence of the order passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) (s) 6320/23, the applicant was directed to deposit Rs.50 lacs before the trial court. While quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No.420 of 2022, this Court in its order dated 15.12.2023 took notice of the aforesaid fact and observed in Paragraph No.8 as follows:
" Even otherwise, grievance of the applicants, relating to the amount Rs.50 lakhs, is no longer subsists on premise of the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Amount of Rs.50 lakhs as mentioned in the F.I.R. is now kept in F.D.R. through Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj in pursuance of the order dated 20.11.2023 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and, as per direction of the Apex Court, opposite party no.3 can claim that money from the court concerned. At this juncture, while the present applicants are not under legal obligation to pay any money to the opposite party no.3 or transfer any property, as mentioned in the F.I.R., in my considered opinion, there is no justification to keep the parties indulge in the criminal proceedings before the court below. Protraction of said trial beget harassment and oppression to both the parties. Opposite party no.3 is at liberty to receive his money from the court concerned as per direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 20.11.2023. Applicant No.1 states that he has no objection to reimburse the aforesaid amount to the person entitled as per direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court. "
Evidently, by order dated 15.12.2023, the opposite party no.3 was granted the liberty to receive the money which was in dispute between the parties from the Court concerned as per direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 20.11.2023. In its order dated 15.12.2023, the Court has also noted the statement of the applicant that the applicant had no objection to reimburse the disputed amount to the person entitled as per direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
It has been argued by the applicant that the amount cannot be disbursed by the Criminal Court but can be disbursed only after adjudication on entitlement by the competent court. It has been argued that the Criminal Court is not competent to consider the entitlement of the complainant to receive the amount.
As noted earlier, the contention of the applicant cannot be accepted.
A perusal of the order sheet of the trial court shows that no directions have yet been issued by the trial court i.e., the opposite party to disburse the amount in favour of the complainant. The opposite party has only acknowledged the filing of the application by the complainant for disbursal of the amount in his favour and has issued notice to the applicant to file her objections. The jurisdiction of the opposite party to disburse any amount can be contested by the applicant before the opposite party itself where the applicant may raise the objections regarding the competence of the opposite party to pass any order.
The contempt application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 15.10.2024 IB