Karnataka High Court
Ashfaq @ Gouspak vs H D Anand Kumar And Ors on 19 September, 2024
Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB
CCC No.200201 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.200201 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
ASHFAQ @ GOUSPAK
S/O MUSHTAK JAMAKHANDI,
AGE: 37 YEARS,
OCC: LL.B STUDENT,
R/O: WARD NO.20 J.M ROAD
ZANDA KATTA,
TQ: & DIST: VIJAYAPURA - 586 104.
...COMPLAINANT
(BY SRI SANGANABASAVA B.PATIL, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
SWETA KULKARNI AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1. SRI. H.D. ANAND KUMAR
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
VIJAYAPURA - 586 101.
PRESENTLY SERVING AS
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
DIRECTORATE OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND
ENFORCEMENT BENGALURU - 01.
2. SRI. SITARAM LAMANI,
THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR (L AND O),
GOLGUMBAZ POLICE STATION,
VIJAYAPURA.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB
CCC No.200201 of 2023
PRESENTLY SERVING AS PSI
HORTI POLICE STATION HORTI,
TQ: INDI, DIST: VIJAYAPURA - 586 101.
3. SRI. K.B. HANNUR
CHC-1255, GOLBUMBAZ POLICE STATION,
VIJAYAPURA - 586 101.
...ACCUSED / RESPONDENTS
4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
GOLGUMBAZ P.S.VIJAYAPURA.
REP. BY ADDL. SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KALABURAGI.
...PROFORMA PARTY
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GOVT. ADV. FOR R1, R2
AND R4)
THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTIONS 10 AND 11 OF
CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 READ WITH ARTICLE 215 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO PUNISH THE
ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 3 FOR COMMITTING THE CONTEMPT OF
COURT WILLFULLY, KNOWINGLY DISOBEYED DIRECTION
GIVEN BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT'S JUDGMENT IN
2014 (3) KCCR PAGE 1977(SC) ARNESHKUMAR V/S. STATE OF
BIHAR AND 2016 CRL.LJ 3156 DR. RINI JOHAR & ANOTHER
V/S. STATE OF M.P. AND OTHERS IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS CCC COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB
CCC No.200201 of 2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) Heard the learned for the complainant and learned Government Advocate for respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed this petition under Sections 10 and 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to punish accused Nos.1 to 3 alleging that, the said accused Nos.1 to 3 named in the petition have committed the contempt of court willfully and disobeyed the direction given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arneshkumar vs. State of Bihar1 and in Dr. Rini Johar & Another vs. State of M.P. and others2 in the interest of justice.
3. It is stated in the petition that, petitioner is a student of law. It is stated by him that, on 27.09.2022 at 4.25 a.m. the PSI of Golgumbaz Police Station, Vijayapura i.e., respondent No.2 without the orders of the Magistrate 1 2014 (3) KCCR PAGE 1977(SC) 2 2016 CRL.LJ 3156 -4- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 and without the permission of the Taluka Executive Magistrate, without giving any reasons for arresting the petitioner on the ground that, he was the member of Popular Front of India and alleged that he was protesting with his followers which amounts to disturbance to the public peace and tranquility in the society. After arrest a case was registered against him in PAR No.86/2022 alleging the offences punishable under Sections 107 and 151 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter he was produced before the Taluka Executive Magistrate on 27.09.2022 and in turn he was remanded to the judicial custody for seven days. It is alleged that such an act of the respondents in arresting the accused without any reason, without permission of the Magistrate is in clear disobedience of the judgments stated above. No show cause notice was issued to him. He has not disturbed any public peace and tranquility. Being aggrieved by the same, as there is disobedience of the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgments by all the accused persons, he has filed the petition before this Court under the provisions of -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 Contempt of Courts Act and for necessary action and punish the accused persons. He has urged several grounds in the petition repeating the facts of the case in the grounds. Hence, it is prayed by the petitioner to allow the petition and take necessary penal action against respondent Nos.1 to 3.
4. The learned Government Advocate took notice for respondents in this petition.
5. Along with the petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced documents from Annexures-A to F in support of his submission.
6. It is argued by the counsel for the petitioner that because of the illegal arrest of the petitioner in violation of the judgments in Arneshkumar's case as well as Rini Johar's case stated supra, there is disobedience of the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court and it amounts to contempt of court. Therefore, as there is clear violation of rights of the petitioner under the provisions of -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 the Article 215 of the Constitution of India, the personal liberty of the petitioner was affected because of this illegal arrest. He submits that as respondent Nos.1 to 3 are responsible for his arrest, they have to be punished accordingly.
7. As against this submission, the learned Government Advocate submits that, there is no disobedience of the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgments stated by the petitioner in the petition. He submits that in view of the provisions of Section 107 and 151 of Cr.P.C. as the petitioner was member of Popular Front of India group and had made hatred speeches therefore to prevent further such illegal acts of the petitioner, the legal action was taken by respondent Nos.1 to 3 in accordance with law and thereafter the proceedings are initiated against the petitioner by registering the case in PAR No.86/2022 for the offence punishable under Sections 107 and 151 of Cr.P.C. and he was thereafter produced before the Taluka -7- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 Executive Magistrate. In turn the Taluka Executive Magistrate has passed judicial order remanding the petitioner to the judicial custody. They have followed the provisions of arrest and hence no such contempt has been committed by the respondents. He prays to dismiss the petition.
8. On perusal of Annexure-A, it is a Preventive Action Report prepared by the police wherein the Police Officer has taken note of involvement of the petitioner as a member of a Popular Front of India and he is the President of the said organization. It is alleged in the report that all of a sudden the petitioner has gathered the people and created disturbance of peace and tranquility in the society by doing hatred speeches. Even one Sitaram, PSI, Law and Order, Golgumbaz Police Station submitted a report to that effect to the Taluka Executive Magistrate, Vijayapur narrating about the acts of the petitioner. It is stated that on 22.09.2022 at 4.00 p.m. this petitioner all of a sudden gathered the people at Ambedkar Circle and committed -8- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 breach of public peace and tranquility and made hatred speeches, thereby he has committed the offence punishable under Sections 107 and 151 of Cr.P.C. which is accompanied with a case diary maintained by the Investigating Officer so also the arrest information document is also served upon the petitioner signed by SHO, GGPS, Vijayapur. The other documents also produced by the petitioner show that, the said action was questioned by the petitioner by filing the review petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C. before the District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapur wherein the said order so passed by the Taluka Executive Magistrate was decided on merits by the IV-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayapur in Criminal Revision Petition No.154/2022 and quashed the proceedings so initiated as per the order dated 24.02.2023.
9. Relying upon this, it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that, in view of quashing of the proceedings against the petitioner by the competent -9- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 Sessions Court, the very arrest of the petitioner by respondent Nos.1 to 3 is illegal.
10. As per the report being prepared by the Investigating Officer it shows that, based upon the report of the PSI, Golgumbaz police station, the crime was registered against the petitioner under Section 107 and 151 of Cr.P.C. The said Sections read as under:
"107. Security for keeping the peace in other cases - (1) When an Executive Magistrate receives information that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility or to do any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility and is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may, in the manner hereinafter provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond with or without sureties for keeping the peace for such period, not exceeding one year, as the Magistrate thinks fit.
(2) Proceedings under this section may be taken before any Executive Magistrate when either the place where the breach of the peace or disturbance is apprehended is within his local jurisdiction or there is
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 within such jurisdiction a person who is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility or to do any wrongful act as aforesaid beyond such jurisdiction.
151. Arrest to prevent the commission of cognizable offences - (1) A police officer knowing of a design to commit any cognizable offence may arrest, without orders from a Magistrate and without a warrant, the person so designing, if it appears to such officer that the commission of the offence cannot be otherwise prevented.
(2) No person arrested under sub-section (1) shall be detained in custody for a period exceeding twenty-four hours from the time of his arrest unless his further detention is required or authorised under any other provisions of this Code or of any other law for the time being in force."
11. On perusal of the provisions of Section 107 and 151 Cr.P.C, they state that it is the duty of the police to maintain peace and order in the society. If there is breach of peace by the public or by any person, the police are at liberty to take necessary action under Section 107 Cr.P.C. for keeping peace in other cases, so also arrest to prevent the commission of a cognizable offence. Here in this case,
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 there was report received by the respondents that this petitioner, being a member of the said group, suddenly gathered the people on 22.09.2022 at about 4.00 p.m. near Ambedkar circle, Vijayapur and committed the breach of public peace so also tried to commit breach of public tranquility. The law mandates that "a police officer knowing of a design to commit any cognizable offence may arrest, without orders from a Magistrate and without a warrant, who is suspected of so designing, if it appears to such officer that the commission of the offence cannot otherwise be prevented. The allegations made in the report of the Investigating Officer as well as the report prepared by the police shows that a preventive action was taken by respondent Nos.1 to 3 so as to keep the law and order in the society. No doubt the law mandates as per the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arneshkumar and Rini Johar's case stated supra that the person who is going to be arrested has to be informed and show cause notice has to be issued to him. But not in all the cases. Here as per the provisions of Section 151 Cr.P.C., the
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:7090-DB CCC No.200201 of 2023 police are empowered to arrest such persons who are involved in breach of public peace and tranquility without warrant or without any permission from the Magistrate to take any action, that has been done by the respondents in this case. Therefore it can never be stated that these respondents have committed any contempt of the guidelines issued in the said judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court as alleged by the petitioner. Therefore, we find no merit in this petition and hence it is liable to be dismissed and proceedings against respondents are to be dropped. Accordingly, we pass the following:
ORDER The petition is dismissed. Consequently, the contempt proceedings against the respondents are dropped.
Sd/-
(S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE Sd/-
(RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE SWK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 3 Ct;Vk