Judges:  Y. K. Sabharwal 
                
                K.G Balkrishnan


Fact - 

             The appellant is a police officer. At the relevant time, on 13 November 1990 he was officer incharge of the police station. It was reported that respondent had assaulted him 30 September 1990, which was the immersion day of Goddess Durga while he was on duty. The case was registered against the respondent.

               In connection with the aforesaid case, the respondent was arrested by the appellant on 13 November1990 from his resident at 7:30 A.M. He was kept in police custody and was produced before a Magistrate on 14 November 1990 The respondent in respect of this very case had been guilty by Session Judge on 6 November1990. The respondent had obtained certified copy of the order of bail on 7 November 1990. The respondent was produced before the magistrate on 14 November 1990 when his advocate produced certified copies of the order of Session Judge and thus, he was released by the Magistrate.

                  The only controversy is whether the respondent has produced before the appellant, the certified copy of the order of bail at the time of his arrest; according to the respondent it was produced.

                   The respondent initiated contempt proceeding against the appellant in the High Court of Calcutta. The High Court on appreciation of evidence Held that copy of the bail order was produced before the Appellant who arrested the respondent despite it. The appellant was found guilty of contempt and was sentenced for civil imprisonment for a period of 7 days.


Appeal to Supreme Court

             
                    The present Appeal was filed under section 19 of The Contempt of court Act, 1971 before Supreme Court.


Decision of the Supreme Court - 

                       Appeal is dismissed. The charge has been established beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant, and High Court has rightly held Appellant guilty of Contempt of Court. It is not possible to accept the apology now rendered by the appellant after the lapse of nearly 12 Years. The respondent was deprived of his personal liberty despite grant of bail by the Session Judge.

0 comments:

Post a comment

See Also..