Prem Kumar Pawar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4997 MP

                                                            1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                      BEFORE
                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
                                               ON THE 28 th OF MARCH, 2023
                                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 13508 of 2023

                          BETWEEN:-
                          PREM KUMAR PAWAR S/O DHANRAJ PAWAR, AGED
                          ABOUT    45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR, R/O
                          JAGJIVAN WARD, DISTRICT KATNI (MADHYA
                          PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....APPLICANT
                          (NONE FOR APPLICANT)

                          AND
                          THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S.
                          KUTHLA, DISTRICT KATNI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI C.S. PARMAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
                          RESPONDENT/STATE. )

                                This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                          following:
                                                             ORDER

Division Bench of this Court has taken suo motu cognizance of communication made by Chairman of State Bar Council of M.P asking entire Lawyer community in State of M.P. to abstain from Court work.

2. In PIL vide order dated 24.3.2023 passed in W.P. No.7295/2023 in para-18 following directions were issued:-

"18. Under these circumstances, since the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been violated and keeping in mind the interest of the poor litigants, we deem it just and necessary to issue the following directions:-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Signing time: 3/29/2023 5:53:30 PM

(i ) All the advocates throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh are hereby directed to attend to their court work forthwith. They shall represent their clients in the respective cases before the respective courts forthwith;

(ii) If any lawyer deliberately avoids to attend the court, it shall be presumed that there is disobedience of this order and he will be faced with serious consequences including initiation of proceedings for contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act;

(iii) If any lawyer prevents any other lawyer from attending the court work, the same would be considered as disobedience of these directions and he will be faced with serious consequences including initiation of proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act;

(iv) Each of the judicial officers are directed to submit a report as to which lawyer has deliberately abstained from attending the court;

(v) The judicial officers shall also mention the names of advocates who have prevented other advocates from entering the court premises or from conducting their cases in the court;

(vi) Such advocates shall be dealt with seriously which may even include proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act as well as being debarred from practice."

3. Division Bench had issued directions to Advocates to attend the Court work forthwith and to represent their clients in their respective cases. If abstention from work is deliberate then Advocate will have to face serious consequences including initiation of contempt petition.

4. In view of same, as Advocates for the parties are not appearing in the case, Registry is directed to issue show cause notice to counsel for the petitioner(s) as well as counsel for the respondent(s) whose name appears in the Vakalatnama to give explanation why Contempt Proceedings may not be

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Signing time: 3/29/2023 5:53:30 PM

initiated against him/her/them for deliberate violation of order dated 24.3.2023 passed in W.P. No.7295/2023.

5. Notices shall not be issued to Government Advocates appearing for State since they remained present in Court and complied with directions passed in W.P. No.7295/2023.

6. Since applicant is in jail, therefore, this Court deem it appropriate to hear the case and consider it on its merits. Since it is question of liberty of applicant.

7. Government Advocate appearing for State argued that applicant was absent when case was committed for hearing on 27.04.2018. Applicant with great difficulty could be arrested after period of two years on 03.12.2020. Applicant filed regular application for grant of bail which was dismissed on 15.12.2020. Applicant approached High Court and he was granted regular bail on 16.08.2022. Thereafter, applicant again did not appear before trial Court. Witnesses namely Anil Dubey and Devendra Singh also appeared in Court on 24.01.2023. Due to absence of accused, evidence could not be recorded. There is delay in trial due to repeated absence of applicant in Court and only two witnesses could be examined out of 31 witnesses. It is submitted that in these circumstances, applicant may not be enlarged on bail.

8. Heard the counsel for State.

9. Applicant was twice granted benefit of bail by Court. On both occasion applicant has abused the bail granted to him and did not appear before rial Court.

10 Considering the aforesaid circumstances, bail application is dismissed.

11. Registry is directed to register separate MCC for issuing contempt Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Signing time: 3/29/2023 5:53:30 PM

notice to advocates in application.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE sp/-

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUNIL KUMAR PATEL Signing time: 3/29/2023 5:53:30 PM