$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 18th March, 2014
+ CONT. CAS. (CRL.) 2/2013
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION ..... Petitioner
Through
versus
ADARSH KANT KAPOOR ..... Respondent
In person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.P. MITTAL
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
Crl.M.A. Nos.17931/2013 & 4012/2014 & Cont. Cas. (Crl.) 2/2013 Criminal contempt proceedings were initiated against the respondent Adarsh Kant Kapoor by orders dated 15th /22nd March, 2013 passed by a single Judge in RSA 55/2013, Adarsh Kant Kapoor Vs. Chief Justice of India and Others. During the pendency of the said contempt proceedings in view of subsequent developments, by orders dated 21st October, 2013 and 28th February, 2014, two more show cause notices were issued to the respondent Adarsh Kant Kapoor.
2. The respondent, a person of Indian origin, it is stated, is a doctor and a lawyer in the United States of America. Cont. Case 2/2013 Page 1 of 5
3. During the pendency of the contempt proceedings, the respondent had agreed and stated that he wanted to tender unconditional apology and by order dated 23rd May, 2013 he was required to file an affidavit. In the next order i.e. order dated 27th May, 2013, it is observed that the affidavit filed did not amount to unconditional apology and the respondent refused to place any further affidavit on record. Subsequently in order dated 16th September, 2013, it is recorded that the respondent would like to place on record a fresh affidavit tendering unconditional apology for his conduct on 15th March, 2013. Order dated 21st October, 2013 records presence of the respondent and his statement that he had filed a fresh affidavit tendering unconditional apology to the Court in general and particularly to the Judge concerned, who had passed orders dated 15th /22nd March, 2013. We note that pursuant to the said apology, the Regular Second Appeal was listed before the same Judge for hearing and the respondent herein had appeared before the said Judge.
4. The respondent subsequently filed affidavit dated 14th February, 2014 stating that he genuinely and sincerely believed that he did not intentionally indulge in any conduct, which was contemptuous. At the same time, he was not oblivious to the Cont. Case 2/2013 Page 2 of 5 fact that others were always in a better position to neutrally observe, analyze and interpret his behaviour. He accordingly accepted the Court's observations about his conduct on 21 st October, 2013, and tendered unconditional apology for the same and solemnly ensured that he would regard the whole incident as a big learning experience of his life to be more careful, discrete and respectful in future. He believed and understood that Court proceedings have to be conducted in a congenial, calm, composed and conducive manner.
5. Courts adjudicate dispute and decide on contentious issues and submissions raised by the parties. Court decisions may result in one party being dissatisfied or suffering adverse consequences. This, however, does not mean that the party should stall court proceedings, issue/give threats or ask the Judge to recuse from hearing the matter. (see observations of the Supreme Court In Re, Ajay Kumar Pandey (1996) 6 SCC
510).
6. Unfortunately, after the affidavit dated 14th February, 2014 was filed, the respondent wrote another communication which resulted in passing of order dated 28 th February, 2014. Today, when the matter was called out in the morning, the respondent was heard. The respondent had stated that he has Cont. Case 2/2013 Page 3 of 5 realized his mistake and was genuinely repenting. Accordingly, the matter was passed over to enable the respondent to file an affidavit tendering unconditional apology, if he so desires. When the matter is called out after recess, the respondent has filed before us duly attested affidavit dated 18th March, 2014 and has stated as under:-
"3. That I realized that in my aforesaid communication I have unintentionally used some strong words expressing my protest to this Hon'ble Court.
4. That I hereby offer my sincere remorse and unconditional apology for using strong and contemptuous words in may aforesaid communication.
5. That I also sincerely undertake that I shall not resort to any overt or covert audio-video recording the proceedings of this Hon'ble Court or any other court in India without prior permission from the concerned court."
7. We have heard the respondent at length in the morning and believe that the Court should accept the said apology tendered in the affidavit filed and bring the present proceedings to an end. We have quoted the affidavit of the respondent dated 18th March, 2014, in which he has accepted that the respondent would not resort to any overt or covert audio-video recordings of the proceedings in any Court without the permission of the Court concerned. The respondent has expressed remise and unconditionally apologised for using strong and Cont. Case 2/2013 Page 4 of 5 contemptuous words in his communications. We also accept the unconditional apology tendered by the respondent arising out of/ relating to proceedings dated 15th/22nd March, 2013 and 21st October, 2013. The respondent was detained on 31st January, 2014 till he was released from the jail on 8th February, 2014.
8. In view of the aforesaid position, we direct the Registry to release the passports and also withdraw the communication addressed to police authorities in India and abroad as a result of the present contempt proceedings. The respondent will not be obstructed or prevented from leaving India or coming back to India in view of the present contempt proceedings. The bail bond furnished by the respondent will be treated as discharged.
9. The respondent, who appears in person, states that he will deposit Rs.10,000/- with the Prime Minister's Relief Fund within one month. The statement is taken on record.
10. Contempt proceedings and all applications are disposed of.
Dasti.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
G.P. MITTAL, J.
MARCH 18, 2014 NA Cont. Case 2/2013 Page 5 of 5