Sandeep Tripathi vs Miss Tanya Gupta, Civil ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2137 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 2455 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Sandeep Tripathi
 
Opposite Party :- Miss Tanya Gupta, Civil Judge(Junior Division)
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Mohan Pandey
 

 
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.

1.An explanation/affidavit has been filed on behalf of opp. party today in Court, which is taken on record.

2.In compliance of the Court's order dated 27.04.2022, opp. party-Ms. Tanya Gupta, Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. II, Varanasi is present before this Court.

3.Heard Sri Anand Mohan Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned counsel for opp. party.

4. The applicant has alleged violation of the order dated 24.11.2021 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. 482 Cr.P..C. Application No.18364 of 2014.

5. It is stated that the applicant along with his family members have been made accused in Complaint Case No.1379 of 2013, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Sigra, District Varanasi.

6. The applicant along with 9 others approached this Court by filing an Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.18364 of 2014 for quashing the summoning order dated 28.11.2013 passed by the A.C.J.M., Court No.10, Varanasi passed in Complaint Case No.1379 of 2013.

7. This Court by order dated 22.05.2014 disposed of the said application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. of the applicant with an observation that in case the applicant no.1, i.e., Sandeep Tripathi appears and surrenders before the Court below within a period of 30 days from today and applies for bail, then the bail application of the applicant shall be considered and decided in view of settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) AIR 290 as well as judgement passed by the Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. So far as other applicants are concerned, this Court passed an interim order directing that no coercive action shall be taken against them. The said order was subsequently extended from time to time.

8. It appears that on the basis of the interim order passed by this Court, the case was adjourned by the concerned Court.

9. It further transpires that on 28.03.2022 the matter was taken up by the concerned Court and on the basis of judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Asian Resurfacing Road Agency Private Ltd. and Others Vs. C.B.I, AIR 2018 SC 2039 as there was nothing on record that the interim order is operating, the learned Judge issued summons to the other accused except the applicant.

10. On the basis of submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court on 27.04.2022 while issuing notice, directing the opp. party to remain present before this Court and fixing today, i.e., 06.05.2022 passed the following order:-

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

It is contended that this Court on 22.05.2014 in Application u/s 482 No.18364 of 2014 has passed interim order which order has been extended from time to time and lastly it was extended on 24.11.2021.

It is submitted that despite the interim order being operative in the case, the opposite party has issued summons on the basis of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Asian Resurfacing Road Agency Private Ltd Vs. C.B.I., AIR 2018 SC 2039. It is not in dispute that the interim order is extended and the court below despite there being an interim order has proceeded in the matter by issuing summons to the applicant which act amounts to violation of the order passed by this Court and thus, opposite party has committed contempt for not complying with the order of this Court.

In such view of the fact, let the opposite party appear in person on 06.05.2022 to explain as to how despite there being an interim order she has proceeded in the case.

Let this matter be communicated to the opposite party through Registrar General.

List on 06.05.2022."

11. It is pertinent to note that it appears that by mistake Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. II, Varanasi on 08.12.2021 quoted the interim order in her order as follows:-

"???????? ?? ?????????? :

Interim order, if any shall extend till the next date of listing.

No coercive action shall be taken against the accused Sandeep Tripathi and 9 others", whereas there was no interim order passed by this Court restraining any coercive action against the applicant.

12. Despite the applicant having knowledge about the fact that in the order sheet inadvertently the fact that 'no coercive action shall be taken against accused Sandeep Tripathi and 9 others' has been mentioned by the Court below, whereas no interim order was operating in favour of the applicant, i.e., Sandeep Tripathi, yet no effort has been made by the applicant to correct the order dated 08.12.2021, he took the advantage of the said order, whereas it was bounden duty of the applicant to apprise the Court and correct the fact.

13. Despite the fact that the applicant knew that no summon has been issued against the applicant, the applicant approached this Court by filing the contempt application alleging that the summon has been issued by the opp. party in the teeth of the order passed by this Court.

14. A query has been put to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to how the contempt application is maintainable on behalf of the applicant Sandeep Tripathi when there was no interim order operating in favour of Sandeep Tripathi and further no summon has been issued against him, to which, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as summons have been issued against the other co-accused who are family members of the applicant, therefore, the applicant has filed the present contempt application.

15. The said argument on the face of record is misconceived and misleading. Learned counsel for the applicant has obtained an order of issuing notice to the opp. party in contempt application, whereas the applicant was not aggrieved at all by the order passed by the Court below.

16. It is settled in law that a person can approach the contempt court for violation of any order if the violation of order has caused prejudice to the person concerned. In the instant case, the applicant was not at all prejudiced as no summon was issued to him and further the conduct of the applicant is not appreciable, inasmuch as he never informed the Court that there was no interim order operating in the Court below in his favour.

17. It is common knowledge that judicial system is dependant upon the Members of the , it is bonafidely believed that the Member of the Bar shall assist the Court by placing the correct and true facts to adjudicate the case correctly. This Court was given an impression by the counsel for the applicant that he is aggrieved by the action of opp. party. In such circumstances, the opp. party who is a Judicial Officer has been summoned unnecessarily by this Court.

18. In such view of the fact, it is a fit case where a cost of Rs.50,000/- be imposed upon the applicant, which shall be deposited by the applicant within one month from today with the Legal Service Authority.

19. In the event of default of submitting the aforesaid cost of Rs.50,000/-, the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue from the applicant.

20. The personal appearance of opp. party-Ms. Tanya Gupta, Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. II, Varanasi is hereby exempted.

21.With the aforesaid observation, the present contempt application is hereby dismissed and it is consigned to record.

22. After the judgement was delivered, counsel for the applicant has tendered apology, therefore, the cost of Rs.50,000/-, which has been imposed, is withdrawn.

Order Date :- 6.5.2022

NS