ARUN PASWAM S I Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 5-3-2003 passed by the Special Bench of High Court of Judicature at Patna. By the aforesaid order, the Special Bench convicted the appellants S.I. Arun Paswan, S.I. Sakaldeo Yadav and S.I. Syed Ahmad Khan to undergo sentence of two months simple imprisonment in CWJC No. 1220/2002 with MJC No. 722/2002. The appellant - Sudarshan Prasad Mandal, Dy. Superintendent of Police was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default simple imprisonment for 15 days. Criminal Appeals Nos. 473-474 of 2003 have been preferred by S. I. Arun Paswan, Criminal Appeals Nos. 668-669 of 2003 have been preferred by S. I. Sakaldeo Yadav and S. I. Syed Ahmad Khan and Criminal Appeals Nos. 678-679 of 2003 have been preferred by Sudarshan Prasad Mandal, Dy. Superintendent of Police.

(2.) We have heard Mr. Sushil Kumar, learned Senior Advocate on behalf of the appellant in Crl. A. Nos. 473-474 of 2003; Mr. Jaspal Singh, learned Senior Advocate on behalf of appellants in Crl. A. Nos. 668-669 of 2003 and Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior Advocate in Crl. A. Nos. 678-679 of 2003. We have also heard Mr. B. B. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-State in all the appeals.

(3.) We deem it not necessary to recite the genesis of the incident leading to the filing of the complaint by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Sasaram. Suffice it to say that the criminal contempt has been initiated against the appellants herein pursuant to the complaint of 19th January, 2002 lodged by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Sasaram addressed to the Registrar General of the High Court of Judicature at Patna. In the report it is stated inter alia that in the pending investigation of P.S. Case No. 200/2001 under Sections 302 and 201/34, I.P.C. for which a bail application No. 1671/2001 was pending on account of non-production of case diary, the investigation officer - S.I. Arun Paswan (contemner) was directed to produce the case diary on 10-1-2002 on which date, on the request of the public prosecutor, the case was adjourned to 16-1-2002 on the ground that the I.O. had gone to Banka for giving evidence in a case and the case diary would be produced on the next date. But on 16-1-2002 also, the case diary was not produced. Theearned District and Sessions Judge, thereafter, issued a show cause notice to the I.O. to appear personally before him as to why he should not be prosecuted under Section 349, Cr. P.C. On 19-1-2002, the contemner - I.O. appeared before him and filed show cause. He produced the case diary, which was found to be written only upto 28-11-2001. It was also found that the I.O. was present at the police station on 9-1-2002 till 7.00 a.m.. but he did not send the case diary and, therefore, the show cause was rejected. By order dated 19-1-2002, the learned District Judge directed the contemner to remain present in Court till the rising of the Court at 4.30 p.m. and to file further show cause. The complainant further stated that while he was hearing another criminal matter in the Court after recess, a group of persons in plain clothes as also in police uniform were seen on the road in front of his Court room in the civil Court premises and after some time they started raising abusive slogans against him. The learned District Judge stated that he was informed by his bodyguard, some of the senior members of bar associations and also by officers and employees of the civil Court that the band of police officers was being led by Sudarshan Prasad Mandal, Dy. S. P. Sasaram; S.I. Sakaldeo Yadav, posted at Police Lines Dehri; and S.I. Syed Ahmed Khan of Police Line Dehri. It is further stated in the complaint that the complainant learnt from the judicial officers, members of the bar and some of the officers of the executive that a meeting was held in the chamber of the Dy. Superintendent of Police where the Superintendent of Police was also present for creating pandemonium and to assault the District Judge. The aforesaid complaint was followed by another complaint dated 22/23-1-2002. In the subsequent complaint, the complainant inter alia categorically stated that he had received the information by the staff of the civil Court and some of the advocates that the police officers of the District of Rohtas had assembled for a meeting for reviewing law and order situation on the eve of Panchayat Elections to be held on the next day i.e. 20-1-2002 and S.I. Arun Paswan, who was ordered to remain in the Court after rejection of his first show cause went out during the recess hours and asked them to come to the Court premises and they were led by one Dy. S. P., Sasaram. They were raising slogans of "District Judge Muradabad, Bhagalpur Dohrana Hai" and other abusive slogans. It is also stated that they were present in the Court premises with their official arms with them for creating trouble and causing disruption in the Court function. They also abused the presiding Judge raising slogans against the judiciary as also challenging its authority with an intent to criminally assaulting the District Judge after hatching conspiracy. It is also stated in the complaint that Dy. S. P., Sasaram had held the meeting along with the participating officers of the police on 19-1-2002 in the chamber of the Dy. S. P. The civil Court building, Court room and chamber of the complainant were situated on the southern side of the G.T. Road and that of the S.D.M. and Dy. S.P. were situated opposite to the civil Court building, on the northern side of the G.T. Road.