Delhi High Court
Court On Its Own Motion vs Adarsh Kant Kapoor on 18 March, 2014
Author: Sanjiv Khanna
$~
* 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.
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
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
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
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
