CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Vs. NANDLAL BALWNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This morning while the Court proceedings were going on, Mr. Nand Lal Balwani, who claims to be an Advocate enrolled with the Bombay Bar Association since 1995, and had apparently no case on the Board of this Bench, shouted slogans in the open Court and thereafter hurled his shoe towards the Court thereby interrupting the Court proceedings. He was informed that his action was aimed at intimidating the Court and causing interference in conduct of judicial proceedings and amounted to gross contempt of this Court. He was informed of the charge and asked if he had anything to say in his defence. At his request, time was given to him to file an affidavit in response to the charge. The affidavit has been filed.

(2.) Mr. Nand Lal Balwani is present before us and accepts that the charge has been read out to him and he has understood the same. He states that he has filed this affidavit in which he has admitted his intemperate behaviour in the Court this morning. The contemnor was asked if he had anything further to say in his defence and he stated that he did not have anything further to say in his defence but that he had filed an interim affidavit and would like to file a detailed affidavit giving details of how he had been persecuted by the police agencies so far. We do not consider it necessary to examine him any further on that aspect since insofar as the charge of Contempt of Court is concerned, he has nothing further to say.

(3.) Section 14 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971 provides that when it appears to the Supreme Court or the High Court upon its own view, that a person has been guilty of contempt committed in its presence or hearing, the Court may cause such person to be detained in custody, and, at any time before the rising of the Court, inform him about the charges and afford him an opportunity to make his defence. An order of punishment or discharge can thereafter be made.