SARITA PARIKH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Today, this matter has been listed in connection with the rule issued on 20-8-20091, in Suo Motu Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 7 of 2009 against Dr. Sarita Parikh, Ms Annette Kotian and Ms Leila David.

(2.) From the office report dated 20-2-2010, and the connected letter dated 4-2-2010, received from the Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime), Mumbai, it appears that Ms Pavithra Murali, who was the fourth contemnor in the earlier contempt petitions [Suo Motu Contempt Petition No. 3 of 2008 and Suo Motu Contempt Petition (C) No. 226 of 2008], could not be apprehended and that she had left for the United Kingdom and was staying at 10, Peacock Street, Kesgrave Ipswich, Suffolk, United Kingdom. Necessary steps have been taken to inform all the authorities concerned regarding the contempt proceedings and the order which had been passed against her therein.

(3.) However, as far as the other three alleged contemnors in Suo Motu Contempt Petition (Crl.) No. 7 of 2009 are concerned, a letter has been addressed by them to the Registrar, Judicial, indicating that they had contracted chikungunya, and required 3 to 6 month's time for recovery and to appear in court in connection with the said contempt case. They have also prayed for dismissal of the same and in the alternative to extend the period for their personal appearance.