Court On Its Own Motion vs S.K. Singh
1997 Latest Caselaw 32 Del

JUDGMENT

M. Jagannadha Rao, J.

(1) After 1.15 p.m. today when the Judges were about to rise, Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate, came in front of the dias and started shouting at the Court Master that the petition should be placed immediately before the Court. He was advised to restrain himself. However, he raised his voice and continued to shout at the Court Master and at the Judges saying that "Judicial Officers have sold Challans and yet the Judges of this Court were not taking cognizance of the same". Mr. Singh threw a file at the Court Master. We may here mention that this Advocate was present yesterday and mentioned a matter for urgent hearing, and after perusing the same one of us (Chief Justice) felt that the matter was not urgent and the petition should be presented in the Registry for being listed after the Registry scrutinises the papers.

(2) The contemnor also shouted saying that corruption is rampant among the Judicial Officers in the lower Courts where challans are sold, and yet his petition filed in the High Court was not being listed.

(3) He paid no heed to the advice and caution by the Court to restrain himself and continued to shout at the Court that he was not afraid of any one including the Judges and would settle all scores.

(4) Several Counsel, who were present in Court, attempted to restrain Mr. Singh, but to no avail, and he continued with his tirade. At this stage, we were left with no option, but to call a Police Officer to ensure that Mr. Singh does not grapple with the Court Staff. When a member of the security staff came near Mr. Singh and tried to restrain him, he assaulted him. Pti Correspondent, Mr. Dhananjay Mahapatra, tried to restrain the contemnor, while he was grappling with the security personnel. At this stage, Mr. Singh shouted at the other security personnel not to come near him or to touch him as he was the brother of the Police Commissioner.

(5) It is pointed out at this stage by Mr. L.K. Garg, Advocate, who is present in Court, that Mr. S.K. Singh had even uttered the words "Gaddars" (traitors) for Judges. This, prima facia, amounts to lowering the dignity of the Court further.

(6) Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Keshav Dayal, Mr. R.K. Saini, Dr. B.L. Wadhera, and a large number of learned Counsel, who are present, urged the Court to proceed against Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate for contempt of Court.

(7) Even when we are in the process of dictating this order, the contemnor has been trying to raise his voice aggravating the contempt.

(8) At this stage, one of the learned Counsel present in Court tried to persuade Mr. S.K. Singh to apologise for his conduct. On which the said contemnor replied in our presence that he is not at all at fault and it is the Court staff and Judges who are at fault.

(9) The above acts on the part of the contemnor prima faice amounts to criminal contempt in the face of the Court.

(10) Now that it is 1.30 p.m., we will pass final orders after 2 p.m. In the meantime, Mr. S.K. Singh will remain in Court till the Court resumes its afternoon session.

(11) We, therefore, issue notice to the contemnor in exercise of powers under Article 215 of the Constitution of India why he should not be punished for criminal contempt of the Court in the face of the High Court, on the facts above mentioned.

(12) A copy of the above show cause notice was handed over to the contemnor in the afternoon session and he was asked to come forward with his defense, if any. He submitted that he refuses to take cognizance of the notice unless the writ petition filed by him, which is lying under objections and mentioned by him, is listed. He refused to make his defense or say anything even though a further opportunity has been given to him after he had mentioned as above. He submits that the threat of action for contempt is being held out to him to save the prestige of judiciary. In fact, he menacingly looked at the Stenographer and asked him to note down this sentence also.

(13) In the light of the show cause notice and in the light of the repeated opportunities given by us to the contemnor and as he refused to offer any explanation and while we are in the process of dictating this particular paragraph, the contemnor shouted at us and told us to "stop", and that the Court cannot pass any orders till his request for listing of the writ petition is decided, we have no choice but to hold that he has no valid defense. The question of listing of the writ petition cannot be linked up with this matter inasmuch as he has to remove objections raised by the Registry and till then, that case cannot be listed.

(14) The facts mentioned in the show cause notice in regard to which no tenable defense is offered, clearly amount to criminal contempt, namely, his shouting at the Court staff and at the Court, the threatening manner in which he raised his voice and was interrupting the Court, his assaulting the security personnel inside the Court, his telling the other security personnel not to come near him as he is the brother of the Police Commissioner, and his throwing a file across the table to the Court Master, these acts, in our view, clearly amount to criminal contempt of Court in the face of the Court.

(15) The contemnor, leave aside showing any regret or penitence, has further been interrupting and shouting at the Court while the order was being dictacted. We do not think that this is a fit case for showing any indulgence or lenience, more so because he is an Advocate of whom dignified behaviour and conduct is expected. More so because such conduct is not expected of a Lawyer. The conduct of the contemnor before us is highly reprehensible and tends to lower the authority and dignity of Court, and interferes with due course of judicial proceedings.

(16) We, therefore, hold the contemnor clearly guilty of contempt of Court in the face of Court falling within Article 215 of Constitution of India and the next question will be to decide the quantum of sentence.

(17) On the question of sentence, the contemnor was asked whether he had anything to say. He replied threateningly that the Court will not sentence him. Here we are bearing in mind the fact that the above incidents happened in the face of the Court and the behaviour was contumacious and belligerent before the issue of the show cause notice and during the time when the show cause notice was being read out and also while we are passing the final order. We are again bearing in mind the fact that the contemnor is an Advocate, who is required to assist in upholding the dignity of the Court and majesty of law. We are told that he is enrolled as a Member of the Bar Council in Bihar.

(18) The procedure which we have adopted above, in our view, is consistent with the principles of natural justice. We have also borne in mind the cognate provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, while exercising powers under Article 215 of the Constitution of India.

(19) As the conduct of the contemnor is extremely contumacious, deliberate and reprehensible, we are of the view that the contemnor ought to be sentenced to six months simple imprisonment. We do so accordingly. The contemnor will be taken into custody and taken to Tihar Jail today itself. A copy of this order be sent to the Bar Council of India as well as the Bar Council of Bihar. Before parting with the case, we may note that the contemnor has torn off the show cause notice given to him and told the Police Inspector to give the same to the Judges.