Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The appellant, who is practising as an Advocate at Narnaul, was representing the plaintiff in Civil Suit titled Hari Ram v. Municipal Committee. On September 20, 1985, the appellant appeared in the said suit for the plaintiff and orally prayed for ex-parte ad:interim stay. The said request was declined by the Subordinate Judge, Narnaul, who ordered for issuance of notice to the defendants for September 24,1985. On September 24, 1985, Shri Banwari Lal Sharma ap- peared for the defendants and requested for a date for filing a reply to the said application which request was not opposed by the appellant but the appellant prayed for ad- interim stay in favour of the plaintiff. The Subordinate Judge told the appellant that the question of ad-interim stay would be considered after filing of the reply by the defendants and adjourned the case for September 26, 1985. It appears that the appellant was not satisfied with this order passed by the Subordinate Judge and according to the Subor- dinate Judge, Shri S.R. Sharma, the appellant uttered the following words in the Court:

The High Court found that the appellant had attacked the integrity of the learned Sub-Judge by saying that he was a contractor of the Municipal Committee, that he was in collu- sion with the Deputy Commissioner and he was under his influence and that the attack made on the learned Sub-Judge disparaging in character and derogatory to his dignity would vitally-shake the confidence of the public in him and that the aspersions made against the Sub-Judge were much more than merely insult and, in fact, they scandalise the court in such a way as to create distrust in the people's mind and impair confidence of the people in court. The High Court was, therefore, of the view that the appellant had brought himself clearly within the ambit of contempt of court and he was accordingly found guilty under section 2(c)(i) of the Act. As regards the apology tendered by the appellant, the High Court observed that this was not the first occasion and earlier also the proceedings for contempt had been initiated against him in pursuance of a report made by Shri K.K. Chopra, the then Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narnaul in C.O.C.P. No. 12 of 1983 wherein also the appellant had tendered an unqualified apology in the High Court and the rule against him was discharged and that the appellant is addicted to using contemptuous language and making scurri- lous attacks on the judges. The High Court held that apology must, in order to dilute the gravity of the offence, be voluntary, unconditional and indicative of remorse and contrition and it should be tendered at the earliest opportunity and further, that the aspersions men- tioned in the letter Ex. P.A. at 'A' to 'A' sent by Shri S.R. Sharma to the District and Sessions Judge, Narnaul were made by the appellant with a design and were not simply thoughtless and in such a case, the appellant cannot be allowed to get away by simply feeling sorry by way of apolo- gy as the easiest way. The High Court did not, therefore, accept the apology tendered by the appellant. Shri Mahabir Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has submitted that the High Court was in error in holding that the appellant had uttered the words mentioned in the letter Ex. P.A. sent by Shri S.R. Sharma to the District and Sessions Judge, Narnaul. Shri Mahabir Singh has invited our attention to the statements of the witnesses who were examined before the High Court and has laid partic- ular emphasis on the statement of Shri Banwari Lal Sharma, Advocate, who was representing the defendant Municipal Committee in the Civil Suit before the Subordinate Judge and was present in the court at the relevant time and who has stated that the appellant has not used any unparliamentary or foul language towards Shri S.R. Sharma, Sub-Judge. Shri Mahabir Singh has also referred to the statements of Shri Gyan Chand Sharma, Advocate and Shri Satya Narain Sharma, Advocate who have stated that they were present in the court of SubJudge, Narnaul on September 24, 1985 at about 2 or 2.15 p.m. when the appellant had requested the Subordinate Judge to grant ad-interim stay against the Municipal Commit- tee for demolition of a chabutra in the case of Hari Ram v. Municipal Committee and the said request of the appellant was declined by Shri S.R. Sharma and that the appellant did not use any discourteous or impolite language against Shri S.R. Sharma.