Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Noora Begum vs Commissioner And Others ... on 23 August, 2023
Supplementary-2
Serial 288
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP (C) 2207/2023 CM (5156/2023)
Noora Begum
... Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Faisal Qadiri, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Bhat Shafi, Advocate
V/s
Commissioner and others (Srinagar Municipal Corporation)
... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Zubair Ahmad, Advocate for caveators
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
23-08-2023
Mr. Syed Faisal Qadiri, Sr. Advocate, appearing counsel for the
petitioner argued the matter responded by Mr. Zubair Ahmad,
Advocate, appearing on behalf of the caveator.
During the course of the hearing, it transpired that the petitioner
herein has filed a suit on the subject matter before the Municipal
Magistrate, Srinagar, confronted with the same, the counsel for the
petitioner sought time to produce a copy of the suit and prayed for
listing of the matter on Monday i.e. 28.8.2023.
While the court was dictating the order in the matter, Mr. A. M.
Dar, Senior Advocate, sitting in the court next to Mr. Qadiri, stood up
and contended that he be also heard in the matter for the petitioner. In
response, the court observed that since one Senior Advocate has
already argued on behalf of the petitioner and has sought time for
producing the copy of the suit, it would not be appropriate to rehear
the matter on behalf of the same party through another counsel. On
this observation of the court, Mr. Dar reacted furiously and shouted
that "this is ridiculous" and that there is no bar in hearing other
WP (C) 2207 of 2023 Page |2
counsel for the same party in a matter. The court requested Mr. Dar to
take his seat and allow the court to proceed with dictating the order in
the matter, however, Mr. Dar interrupted the court proceedings and did
not allow the court to dictate the order and also to deal with the rest of
the cases in the list. The court continued to request Mr. Dar to take his
seat and instead he continued to interrupt the court proceedings. The
other advocates present in the court including few senior advocates
also requested Mr. Dar to take the seat and to allow the court to
proceed in the matter, but Mr. Dar refused and kept shouting and
interrupting the court proceedings compelling the court to convey Mr.
Dar that his conduct warrants initiation of contempt proceedings
against him, in response thereof Mr. Dar removed his robes in the open
court and created a scene.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the court was left
with no option but to proceed in contempt jurisdiction against Mr. Dar,
in that, his conduct in causing interruption in the court proceedings and
creating a scene besides making the above said remark in not granting
him the audience were contemptuous in the face of the court.
Since Mr. Dar created a scene in the court, the court decided to
adjourn the proceedings for a while and asked Registrar Judicial of this
court not to allow Mr. Dar to leave the court, to enable the court to
proceed with the matter and other cases of the list.
The court was convened after 10 minutes and Mr. Dar was asked
to explain his conduct and why he be not convicted of the contempt of
the court and kept in custody till rising of the court, on this the other
advocates present in the court, while maintaining that the conduct of
Mr. Dar did not behove his status as a senior advocate yet requested
the court to take a lenient view in the matter.
At this stage Mr. Dar showed his remorse and repentance by his
conduct. While court is conscious of the fact that power to punish for
contempt is rare species of judicial power which by very nature calls
for exercise with great care and caution and warrants to be exercised
where silence is no longer an option, yet it cannot be overlooked that
WP (C) 2207 of 2023 Page |3
power to punish for contempt is to secure public respect and
confidence in judicial process, more so when the conduct and actions
of an advocate may pose a real and imminent threat to the purity of the
court proceedings cardinal to any court's functioning as in such a
situation the court does not only have the right but also the obligation
to protect itself. The aforesaid observations have been noticed and laid
down by the Apex Court in a series of judgments including in case
titled as "R. K. Anand vs. Delhi High Court" reported in 2009 (8)
SCC 106.
Having regard to the aforesaid principles of law and taking note of
the requests made by the advocates present in the court including some
senior advocates as also the remorse and repentance shown by Mr. Dar
by his conduct, it is deemed appropriate not to proceed further in the
matter. As such, proceedings are dropped.
List on 28.8.2023 for further proceedings.
(JAVED IQBAL WANI)
JUDGE
Srinagar
23-08-2023
N Ahmad
