Gujarat High Court
Rajendra Mistry Co Ordeinator Of vs Dileep Sanghani & on 6 May, 2014
Bench: M.R. Shah, R.P.Dholaria
R/CR.MA/14011/2012 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT) NO. 14011
of 2012
==========================================
===
RAJENDRA MISTRY CO ORDEINATOR OF ....Applicant(s)
Versus
DILEEP SANGHANI & 1....Respondent(s)
=============================================
Appearance:
MS AMEE YAJNIK, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
HL PATEL ADVOCATES, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 2
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA
Date : 06/05/2014
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1.0. In response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent has initially appeared as party in person. Thereafter, Shri Vijay Patel, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the respondent and today Shri B.P. Tanna, learned Senior Advocate has appeared with Shri Vijay Patel, learned advocate for the respondent. An affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of respondent. Shri B.P. Tanna, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent has stated at the bar that he does not invite any further reasoned order while taking cognizance against the respondent and keeping all the defences which may be available to the respondent open and to give the opportunity to the respondent to put forward his case at the time of final hearing.
2.0. In view of the above stand taken by Shri B.P. Tanna, learned Senior Advocate for respondent, we are not passing any reasoned order while taking cognizance of criminal contempt against the Page 1 of 3 R/CR.MA/14011/2012 ORDER respondent in the matter and while framing the charge against the respondent.
3.0. We have gone through, considered and taken into consideration the contents of the speech delivered by the respondent at the function organized by the Jamnagar Market Yard on Saturday 2.6.2012. On going through the same and considering the above, we are prima facie of the opinion that speech given by the respondent and the contents of the speech is contemptuous and it amounts to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act. As such, the respondent has not submitted anything on merits.
4.0. However, applying our mind to the submissions made by your counsel Shri B.P. Tanna, we decide to frame the charge against the respondentyou as under:
"You, Shri Dilip Sanghani, residing at Amreli attended and delivered the public speech organized by Jamnagar Market Yard on Saturday 2.6.2012, you attended the same as guest and speaker. The said public speech / text of the said public speech of which your attention is drawn and is mentioned in para 2.2 of the present applicant is highly contemptuous and amounts to criminal contempt as per Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act and which is liable to punish under Section 12 of the said Act. The text of the aforesaid public speech tantamounts to lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any Court or interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner, which amounts to criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act and is liable to punish under Section 12 of the Act. We are authorized to initiate contempt proceedings under the said act against you."Page 2 of 3
R/CR.MA/14011/2012 ORDER 5.0. The aforesaid charge has been read over to the respondent who is personally present in the Court and in presence of his counsel.
6.0. At this stage, at the request of Shri Tanna, learned Senior Advocate for the respondent, matter is adjourned to 26.6.2014 for final hearing.
sd/ (M.R.SHAH, J.) sd/ (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) Kaushik Page 3 of 3