Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY in Shyamlal Lajwanti Devi Kukreja Smriti ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 13 May, 2015Matching Fragments
30. In AIR 2014 S.C. 3020 (Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs. Arun Shourie), the Apex Court opined that the functions of the Commission appointed under the 1952 Act (The Commission of Inquiry Act, 1952) are not like a body discharging judicial functions of judicial power. Thus, the said authority was not treated as a 'Court'.
31. In the present case, the necessary ingredients for treating the proceeding before the Collector as 'Court' are absent. In other words, the proceeding before the Collector in the instant matter cannot be treated to be a proceeding before a 'Court'. Thus, the initiation of contempt proceeding by the Collector is without authority of law and is liable to be interferred with.