Ashok Naik vs Ramadugu Omkar Varma
2021 Latest Caselaw 4720 Tel

     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                             AND
                  THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI

                                  C.A.No.12 of 2020

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)

          The present contempt appeal is arising out of the order dated

24.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.C.No.1179 of

2019 by which the appellant (respondent in the contempt petition)

has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of four weeks and

a fine of Rs.2,000/- has also been imposed upon him.

The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the contempt

petition was preferred by the respondent herein, Ramadugu Omkar

Varma, for arresting him without issuing notice under Section

41-A of Cr.P.C. in relation to Crime No.486 of 2019 dated

25.06.2019 registered under Sections 420, 354 and 509 of I.P.C,

thereby alleging violation of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar1.

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued before this

Court that the respondent, Ramadugu Omkar Varma, was involved

in an offence of cheating, a crime was registered even for an offence

under Section 354 of I.P.C. and after arresting the accused person,

he was immediately produced before the learned III Additional

Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, who by an order dated

27.06.2019 has arrived a conclusion that Section 41(1)(b)(ii) of

Cr.P.C is complied with. There is a check list also at Page No.54

and the check list reveals that arrest of the accused was necessary

for proper investigation of the case, thereby keeping in view the

fact that there was a threat to the victim and other witnesses. The

2014(8) SCC 273

learned Single Judge, only because a notice was not given, has

inflicted the punishment. It has been stated that the learned

Single Judge, while inflicting the punishment, has not at all

considered the order dated 27.06.2019 passed by the learned III

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

It is true that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has framed

guidelines in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra). The fact remains

that satisfaction was recorded by the learned III Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and the learned Single Judge

has not taken into account the aforesaid fact at all.

This Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would

be subserved by issuing a warning to the present appellant to be

more cautious in future and to adhere to strict compliance of the

directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Arnesh Kumar (supra).

Resultantly, the Contempt Appeal is allowed. The impugned

order sentencing the appellant is set aside with a warning to be

more cautious in future and to comply the judgment delivered in

the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra).

Learned counsel for the appellant is fair enough in informing

this Court that the fine amount has been deposited by the

appellant in the Registry of the High Court and the same be

transferred to the Prime Minster's COVID-19 Pandemic Relief

Fund.

Resultantly, the Registrar General of this Court shall

transmit the fine amount already deposited by the appellant to the

Prime Minsters' COVID-19 Pandemic Relief fund.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_______________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 31.12.2021 JSU