ABRAHAM Vs. DIRECTOR OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition to review the judgment passed on 18-2-1983 holding that the 3rd respondent is guilty of contempt in disobeying the order of this court in letter and in spirit, that the apology offered in the counter - affidavit cannot be accepted for reasons mentioned in the order and that in view of the offer by the offender to tender apology in any other form so as to make amends for his conduct he be permitted to tender an apology in public. We therefore made directions to tender apology in Kozhancherry where the 3rd respondent is working as a Junior Engineer, Telephones.

(2.) AN apology may or may not be accepted by a court depending upon whether a court is satisfied with the genuineness of the apology tenderred and the seriousness of the contempt. If the apology is empty or hollow there is no meaning in accepting the apology. Quite often we find ritualistic mention in counter - affidavits of offer of apologies. Quite often they may not be expressions of sincere regret. The mere fact that an apology is offered need not save a person from consequences of his guilt if he is found guilty of contempt. The court will have to consider judiciously whether there is genuine regret expressed and whether in the circumstances that apology would be sufficient and adequate.