Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

In Reference vs Ravi Shyamnani on 19 January, 2017

                              1
                   CONCR No.3/2015



19.01.2017

     Respondent        Ravi    Shyamnani        present   in

person.

I.A No.21186/2016, filed by the Contemner, is allowed. He is permitted to disengage Advocate Shri D. C. Mallik, learned counsel who had been previously engaged by him to argue his matter as well as Advocate Ms. Swati Sharma.

As the matter is required to be heard finally, I.A No.21552/2016 filed by the Contemner would be heard and decided at the time of final hearing of the matter.

Heard the Contemner on the application filed by him as a special request which has been numbered as 1477/2017.

The Contemner submits that in the present case he has raised several issues apart from the contempt petition initiated against him. It is stated that he has raised issues regarding instances of malpractice and corruption at lower courts and, therefore, the matter be directed to be listed before a Full Bench, i.e. a Bench comprising of Three Judges. He has also submitted that the present Contempt Petition should not be listed before the same Bench but should be listed before different Division Benches by rotation.

Having heard the Contemner, we are of the considered opinion that the present case is a Reference for taking up proceedings for criminal contempt against the Contemner and has nothing to do with the issues sought to be included by the Contemner through the aforesaid application.

In the circumstances, as the present case is confined to the limited issue in Reference before this Court, therefore, the application filed by the Contemner, as a special request, which has been numbered as 1477/2017 is hereby rejected.

Though the case was listed for hearing today on the question of framing charges, the Contemner submits that he was unable to understand the orders of this Court and is, therefore, not prepared to argue the case finally. He has prayed for time to file an additional reply. He has specifically stated that he has already filed a reply on the previous date and he wishes to file an additional reply. He has been explained in Hindi that the notice issued by this Court in the Reference is a notice for contempt and that he has to file a reply to the same and thereafter hearing would take place. In case he wishes to obtain certain documents, he is permitted to do so in terms of the order dated 3.2.2016.

After much efforts, the Contemner has understood the said aspect. He prays for and is granted two weeks time to file an additional reply. It is made clear to him that on the next date the matter shall be heard and decided finally in respect of framing charges against him and that he should come prepared for argument on that date.

On having explained the aforesaid aspects to the Contemner in Hindi, he has stated before this Court that he has understood the same and that he shall file his additional reply within two weeks and shall argue the case finally in respect of framing charges on the next date of hearing.

The petitioner is also permitted to obtain documents, if any, in terms of the order dated 3.2.2016.

On the request of the Contemner, the matter be listed for hearing on 9.2.2017.

C.C as per rules.

     ( R. S. JHA )                       ( A. K. JOSHI )
       JUDGE                               JUDGE


mms/-