Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

7. After the above order was dictated in the open Court, Mr. K.K. Jha 'Kamal', Advocate on behalf of the petitioner, began to threaten the learned single Judge in a most derogative manner challenging his authority for having issued the contempt against the writ petitioner, his client. Immediately, the learned single Judge, on noticing the unbecoming behaviour of the counsel, passed the following order:

After the above order was passed in the Open Court. Mr. K.K. Jha 'Kamal', Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner threatened the Court by saying that "by initiating contempt proceedings, the controversy will not die down and it will flare up". He used these words in a most offensive and derogatory manner in the Open Court in full view of a large number of lawyers including some senior members of the Bar. He further remarked that he is already facing two Contempts and is ready to face another. This action on the part of the learned Advocate is itself contemptuous. I am constrained to initiate proceedings for contempt against Mr. K.K. Jha 'Kamal', Advocate, to protect the majesty of law and dignity of the Court. Slave this action amounts to Criminal Contempt, I direct the Registry to place this matter also before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for consideration by an appropriate Larger Bench. Proceedings against Mr. Jha will be placed as a separate contempt proceedings. I feel that personal appearance of Mr. Jha is necessary before the Bench. He is directed to furnish bail bond to the tune of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) before the Jt. Registrar (Judicial) of this Court with an undertaking to appear before the appropriate Bench when the matter is listed. The Registrar will communicate to Mr. Jha the date of listing of the matter before the appropriate Larger Bench after obtaining instructions from Hon'ble the Chief Justice. 8. The next day, i.e., on 22.12.2006. the Joint Registrar (List and Computers) of this Court placed the file before the Chief Justice through a note for a direction for initiating criminal contempt against both Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, the writ petitioner and against Mr. K.K. Jha 'Kamal' his lawyer, as directed by the order dated 21.12.2006 in the writ petition No. 7126 of 2006. The Chief Justice, by the Administrative order dated 22.12.2006 directed for instituting the contempt proceeding against both of them and directed for posting the matter before the Larger Bench of 5 (five) Judges to be presided over by the Chief Justice on 5.1.2007.
9. In the meantime, on 4.1.2007, a Letter Patent Appeal has been filed on behalf of the petitioner-contemner, Ashok Kumar Gupta through the same counsel, K.K. Jha 'Kamal' challenging the order dated 21.12.2006 passed by the learned single Judge Justice Permod Kohli initiating contempt proceedings against both. Ultimately, both Letters Patent Appeal and the contempt matters came up before the five Judge's Bench on 5.1.2007 as already directed.
10. Mr. K.K. Jha 'Kamal', the counsel contemner was present. He made his sub missions before the Larger Bench. After hearing Mr. K.K. Jha 'Kamal', the counsel contemner appearing for the contemner-petitioner; the Larger Bench felt that there is prima facie material to initiate contempt proceedings against both of them and accordingly issued show-cause notice to them. Since an advocate is involved in the contempt proceedings, the Larger Bench thought it fit to issue notice to the Presidents of various advocates Associations. Bar Council and the Advocate-General for seeking their assistance in the disposal of the contempt matter against the counsel of this Court. In the same order, the Larger Bench felt that Letters Patent Appeal, challenging the order of learned single Judge, is not maintainable as no orders have been passed by the Single Judge under Rule 17 of the Jharkhand High Court Rules and the learned single Judge merely referred the matter to the Chief Justice to post it before the appropriate Bench for initiating contempt proceeding and passing further appropriate orders as there are materials for contempt and, accordingly, dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal. The said order passed by the Larger Bench on 5.1.2007 is as follows:
5. That from the aforesaid principles of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is clear that even High Court and Supreme Court Judges are not immune from criminal prosecution and the question of immunity against the subordinate judicial officers in the background of the principle is not permissible, in accordance with law, laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
6. That, thus Hon'ble High Court has power to control the subordinate judicial both judicially and administratively under Articles 227 and 235, respectively of the Constitution of India and if Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta has invoked this Judicial Power of this Hon'ble Court, as advised under Article 227 and drafted by the alleged contemner lawyer, the question of contempt committed by him does not and cannot arise, in the facts and circumstances of this case, stated hereinafter. It was proper for this Hon'ble Court to examine the allegations against Shri Pankaj Kumar and if it was found not sustainable in accordance with law the same should have been dismissed, or it would have found sustainable in accordance with law, the direction, as prayed for should have been issued by this Hon'ble Court to the Governor of State of Jharkhand to respect of Shri Pankaj Kumar. But without examining the same in its entirety, this Hon'ble Court headed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Kohli took entirely different view, contrary to law, as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court; as aforesaid and started criminal contempt proceedings against the alleged contemner lawyer; as well as his client Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, which has led to this controversy as well as this criminal contempt proceedings, which is not sustainable in accordance with law, in accordance with legal opinion by the alleged contemner lawyer.
Page 13, Para 6. That, thus Hon'ble High Court has power to control the subordinate judicial both judicially and administratively under Article 227 and 235, respectively of the Constitution of India and if Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta has invoked this Judicial Power of this Hon'ble Court, as advised under Article 227 and drafted by the alleged contemner lawyer, the question of contempt committed by him does not and cannot arise, in the facts and circumstances of this case, stated hereinafter. It was proper for this Hon'ble Court to examine the allegations against Shri Pankaj Kumar and if it was found got sustainable in accordance with less than same should have been dismissed or it would have found sustainable in accordance with law, the direction, as prayed for should have been issued by this Hon'ble Court to the Governor of State of Jharkhand in respect of Shri Pankaj Kumar. But without examining the same in its entirety, this Hon'ble Court headed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Kohli took entirely different view, contrary to law, as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, as aforesaid and started criminal contempt proceedings against the alleged contemner lawyer: as well as his client Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, which has led to this controversy as well as this criminal contempt proceedings, which is not sustainable in accordance with law. In accordance with legal opinion by the alleged contemner lawyer.