Sonia Gupta vs Varun Gupta on 14 March, 2022

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Sonia Gupta vs Varun Gupta on 14 March, 2022

Bench: Sanjeev Kumar

                                                                    Sr. No. 2

        HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                        AT JAMMU



                                                  CPCR No. 4/2016

Sonia Gupta                                                    ..... petitioner (s)

                                 Through :- Mr. Koshal Parihar Advocate

                           V/s

Varun Gupta                                                   .....Respondent(s)

                                 Through :- None

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.A. CHOWDHARY, JUDGE


                                      ORDER

1 This is a petition seeking initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for suppression of relevant information from this Court in the proceedings launched by the respondent under Section 561-A Cr. P.C. It is submitted that, along with the quashment petition, the respondent had also moved an application for grant of interim relief praying, inter alia, for the following reliefs:

(i) FIR No. 62/2015 be stayed;

(ii) Investigation in the impugned FIR be stayed or in the alternative, the respondent herein be released on bail till pendency of the petition.

2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that aforesaid application was supported by an affidavit and the respondent had deliberately not brought to the notice of this Court the factum of pendency of bail application before the trial Court.

3 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and examined the matter, we do not find it a fit case for initiating criminal contempt proceedings against the respondent. It may be true, that, at the time the respondent filed the petition under Section 561-A Cr.P.C along with application for stay, his bail application was pending before the trial Court, but, in the aforesaid petition filed under Section 561-A Cr.P.C, where the respondent was seeking quashment of FIR No.62/2015, he also made a prayer for his release on bail. It may be seen that the aforesaid relief was claimed by the respondent in the alternative, whereas the main interim relief was for staying the investigation in the aforesaid FIR.

4 Be that as it may, we do not find it a case of serious lapse on the part of the respondent which would entail initiation of criminal contempt proceedings. Otherwise also, as per opinion of the learned Advocate General, it is not a fit case for initiating criminal contempt proceeding.

Accordingly, the proceedings in this contempt petition are closed.

                           (M.A. CHOWDHARY)                      (SANJEEV KUMAR)
                                    JUDGE                                  JUDGE
Jammu
14.03.2022
Sanjeev

                          Whether order is speaking:Yes

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jammu & Kashmir High Court