Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Judge vs Xxxx on 10 March, 2025
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
10.03.2025
Dd SL-10-11
CRLCP/2/2025
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION
IN RE: A REPORT SUBMITTED BY ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE, BASIRHAT
VS.
XXXX
in
WPA(P)/12/2025
Mr. Saikat Banerjee, Sr. adv.
Mr. Victor Chatterjee,
Mr. Shirsho Banerjee, Advocates
... ... For the High Court Administration
Mr. Surajit Nath Mitra, Ld. Sr. Adv.
Mr. Santanu Chatterjee,
Mr. Amit Halder,
Mr. Amit Roy, Advocates
... ... For the alleged contemnors
Mr. Surajit Nath Mitra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Debabrata Banerjee,
Mr. Samir Chakraborty, Advocates
.. ...For the Special PP
Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Ld. Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anirban Mitra, Advocate
.. ..For the Civil & Criminal Bar Association
Mr. Kishore Dutta, Ld. Advocate General
Mr. Ritesh Kr. Ganguly, Advocate
.. ...For the State
1.Affidavit-of-service filed in Court be taken on record.
2. Assistant Special Public Prosecutor is present in Court pursuant to our earlier order dated March 5, 2025.
3. Heard the learned Assistant Special Prosecutor, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas.
4. Heard the learned senior advocate for the High Court Administration.
25. Attention of the Court is drawn to Section 17 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by the learned Advocate General.
6. Records depicts that, two complaints received by the High Court Administration from the District judiciary were made over to the learned advocate appearing for the alleged contemnors in Court along with a pen drive containing the materials that were against the alleged contemnors.
7. Rule was also received by the alleged contemnors. The contempt Rules was initially registered as WPA(P) 12 of 2025. It was taken up for consideration on January 14, 2025. By our order dated January 14, 2025, we noted that the Hon'ble the Chief Justice considered the writing of the Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas written to the District Judge, North 24 Parganas enumerating the incidents perpetrated by the members of the Basirhat Criminal Bar Association and Civil Court Bar Association. We also noted that the District Judge North 24 Parganas forwarded such letter by a writing dated January 10, 2025 to the High Court Bar Association. High Court Bar Association placed those two communications before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice when the Hon'ble the Chief Justice in his Lordship's Administrative Side decided to take up the issue on the judicial side. His lordship directed that the issue be taken up on the judicial side and His Lordship directed the matter to be registered suo motu and to be placed before the Division Bench presided over by one of us (Debangsu Basak, J.). We took note of such decision of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice and directed the matter to be listed on January 15, 2025.
8. On January 15, 2025, we took up the matter in presence of the learned advocates of the two Bar Associations being represented by learned senior advocate, the West Bengal Bar Council represented by a senior advocate and learned advocates appearing for the State as well as learned senior advocate appearing for the High Court Administration. We 3 noted the materials brought on record including video clips. We decided to issue Rule against 21 learned advocates. Rule was made returnable on February 26, 2025.
9. In terms of our order dated January 15, 2025, a notice was issued upon the alleged contemnors by the department on January 18, 2025 which was received by the 21 alleged contemnors.
10. The matter was taken up after February 26, 2025. The Public Interest Litigation was treated as a contempt Rule and appropriate corrections were made by the department.
11. By our order dated March 5, 2025, noting an order dated February 26, 2025 passed in CRM(DB) 4386 of 2024, we called upon the concerned learned Special Public Prosecutor, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas to be personally present in Court. Such learned advocate as the Special Public Prosecutor appearing in the POCSO case is present in Court and is represented by his learned senior advocate.
12. Our attention is drawn to the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 and the Rules framed thereunder by the Calcutta High Court.
13. Rules framed by the Calcutta High Court being the Contempt of Courts Rules, 1975, particularly, Rule 20 thereof, requires the High Court to issue a Rule NISI in the event, the High Court is of the view that Rule needs to be issued. Such Rule prescribes Form 1 and Form 2 for the purpose of issuance of Rule.
14. In our view Form 2 is apposite in the facts of the present case since contempt Rule was issued on the basis of a reference made by the learned Additional District Judge as forwarded by the learned District Judge, North 24 Parganas.
15. On perusal of the letter dated January 10, 2025 of the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas as forwarded by the learned District Judge, North 24 Parganas to the High Court Administration, the following contemptuous acts appear to be committed by the alleged contemnors :-
4i) Boycott by the members of the Criminal Bar Association of Basirhat of the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court on November 24, 2024,
ii) On and from November 2, 2024 resolution of both the Barasat Criminal Bar Association and Civil Court Bar Association for abstaining from participating in any judicial work of the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas.
(iii) On and from December 2, 2024, no witnesses being examined in any criminal trial including POCSO matters due to non-participation of the learned advocates of the prosecution as well as of the defence;
(iv) Non-participation of the advocates in respect of bail matters
(v) Members of the two Bar Associations restraining staff and litigants of the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas from entering into the Court room;
(vi) Restraining the Security Guard of the learned Additional District Judge from entering into the Court room;
(vii) Maligning the dignity of the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas by resorting to slogan shouting containing derogative remarks.
(viii) Slogan shouting by the learned members of the Bar for releasing persons on PR bond in lieu of money;
(ix) Body shaming the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas through slogan shouting of the members of the two Bar Associations;
(x) Slogan shouting by the members of the two Bar Association questioning the integrity of the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas;
(xi) Restraining the members of the public from entering the Court room.
5(xii) Switching of the electric connection of the chamber of the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas while she is in her chamber;
(xiii) Disrupting the National Lok Adalat held on December 14, 2024 by creating an ambiance of terror to browbeat judicial officers at the sub-division.
(xiv) Giving interview to the Press maligning the judiciary.
16. Let a Rule in Form 2 be issued against 21 alleged contemnors forthwith.
17. Rule is made returnable on March 17, 2025.
18. Alleged contemnors are represented in Court. Their personal appearance were dispensed with on previous occasion. They need not be physically present in Court on the returnable date so long they are represented by an advocate.
19. So far as the Special Public Prosecutor is concerned, there subsists an order passed on July 15, 2024 by a Division Bench passed in CRM(DB) 2067 of 2024 requiring the trial to be concluded within four months from the next date fixed for recording of evidence.
20. The accused in such criminal proceedings renewed the prayer for bail in CRM(DB) 4386 of 2024 and obtained an order granting bail on the principles of violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Such bail was granted on February 26, 2025 passed in CRM(DB) 4386 of 2024.
21. While granting bail, we noticed an order dated February 17, 2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas to the effect that, the Special Public Prosecutor was absent and did not participate in the judicial work on the ground of the Bar Association taking resolution of cease work.
22. In such circumstances, let a contempt Rule be issued as against Mr. Goutam Banerjee, the Special Public Prosecutor, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas. Such Rule is made returnable on March 17, 2025. The Special Public Prosecutor, Basirhat, North 24 6 Parganas will answer the charges as noted in the earlier paragraph 15 as against the members of the two Bar Associations as also the additional grounds as to why suitable measures be not taken as against him for his refusal to conduct the criminal case on February 17, 2025 before the learned Additional District Judge, Basirhat, North 24 Parganas and whether such conduct amounts to criminal contempt or not.
23. Rule issued against Mr. Goutam Banerjee be numbered separately.
24. Rule be served through the Seresthadar of the Bashirhat Sub- Divisional Court.
25. List the matter on March 17, 2025.
(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)