Delhi High Court - Orders
Court On Its Own Motion vs Nitin Bansal on 11 November, 2025
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~2 (SDB)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CONT.CAS.(CRL) 16/2024
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION .....Petitioner
Through:
versus
NITIN BANSAL .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Tushar Swami, Mr. Shantanu
Shukla and Mr. Kashif Salman, Advs.
(M: 7983528756)
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
ORDER
% 11.11.2025
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
CRL.M.A. 33352/20252. At the outset, it has been brought to the notice of the Court that the order dated 29th October, 2025, passed by this Court was challenged by the Contemnor before the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 17468/2025 titled Nitin Bansal v. The State of Delhi, and on 3rd November 2025, the following order was passed by the Supreme Court:
"1. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner.
2. No ground to entertain the interim prayer made by the petitioner is made out.
3. Let the petitioner first surrender before the concerned Jail Authorities on 06.11.2025.
4. List the matter for further consideration on 12.11.2025"
3. The present application has been filed seeking correction of the order This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/11/2025 at 21:48:15 dated 29th October 2025 wherein, in the extracts in paragraph No.2, inadvertently, the period of imprisonment has been mentioned as three months instead of one month. The main judgment dated 29th October, 2025, clearly and correctly mentions the term of imprisonment as under:-
"30. This Court is of the view that the non-cooperative conduct of the Contemnor, coupled with the fact that the gun was placed on the table by him during the course of the proceedings being conducted by the Local Commissioner, as recorded in the report of the Local Commissioner, sufficiently demonstrates that the Contemnor intended to obstruct the task entrusted to her by the Court. Such conduct on the part of the Contemnor reflects a deliberate attempt with evil motive towards the interference in the administration of justice, and therefore, contemnor is liable to be punished for criminal contempt.
31. The Court, therefore, holds that the conduct of the Contemnor clearly constitutes criminal contempt. Accordingly, in terms of Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Contemnor is sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month along with Rs.2,000/- as fine. If there is non- payment of fine, the sentence shall extend for a further period of 15 days.
32. It is directed that the police authorities shall take Contemnor into custody from the Court itself and the Contemnor be sent to Jail"
4. The extract in paragraph no.2 of the order dated 29 th October 2025 is, accordingly, corrected in terms of paragraph no. 31 of the judgment dated 29 th October 2025.
5. The application is disposed of in these terms.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/11/2025 at 21:48:15
6. Let a copy of this order be given dasti.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J NOVEMBER 11, 2025 kk/ss This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/11/2025 at 21:48:15