HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Vs. C RANGAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel Sri S. Doreraju appearing for the accused.

(2.) THIS Contempt Petition is initiated suo-motu by this Court on receipt of a notice addressed to three Hon'ble Judges of this Court making scandalous allegations against them. A copy of this notice was also sent by the accused to the Registrar (General ). In going through the same, as it was felt that it is scandalous in nature bringing down the dignity of the judges in particular and the Judicial Institution in general, this contempt case was registered against him.

(3.) NOTICE was ordered to the accused, who on appearance as party-in-person filed a detailed statement of objections. After going through the objections and hearing the accused in person, as this Court was not satisfied with the explanation offered and was also prima facie of the view that the material in question was scandalous, per se proceeded to frame charges. The trial was held. During the trial, the Registrar (General)was examined as CW-1 and he deposes as to how the contempt action was initiated on receipt of the letter addressed by the accused. In the cross-examination of CW-1 by the learned Counsel for the accused who has entered appearance at this stage, it was pointed out that there were certain grammatical mistakes and because of the same, the entire contents of the letter become meaningless. However, this suggestion was denied by CW-1 inter alia stating that inspite of the grammatical mistakes, the meaning conveyed is very clear. No material worthwhile to hold the accused not guilty is brought out in the cross-examination apart from the aforesaid suggestion. After closing of the case by the prosecution, the accused examined himself as DW-1 and stated that he is working as a Senior assistant for the last 23 years at Karnataka State Co-operative Marketing federation. It is stated that he is a B. Com Graduate and has after reading the contents of the impugned notice, put his signature. He further states that as he had three cases pending in the Family Court and was not able to get favourable result, he got frustrated and on the advise of his friends sri Govinda and Sri Venkataswamy of Bagepalli, the said letter came to be drafted by him. It is further stated that he was in confused state of mind and hence, he may be pardoned if there is any mistake. Before considering the merits, arguments vis-a-vis evidence in this matter, we have to keep in mind the pronouncements of the Apex Court in respect of contempt matters, especially scandalising the Courts or lowering the dignity of the Courts. In this regard, the pronouncement of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. D. C. Saxena Vs. Hon'ble The Chief Justice of India reported in (1995) 5 SCC 216, is worth noting. After referring to number of earlier pronouncements, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered in detail, the definition of Criminal Contempt and observed thus: