ANTONY C C Vs. P S RANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can a review lie in contempt cases is the question for consideration. R.P. Nos. 947 and 948 of 2004 have been filed to review the orders passed in Contempt Case Nos. 854/2004 and 807/2003. We need not enter the facts as the extra thing revolves around the maintainability of review against an order discharging the contemnors.

(2.) Under Rule 6 of the Contempt of Court Rules framed by the Kerala High Court including the explanation added in 2001, a contempt case filed before the Single Judge is to examine as to whether there exists a prima facie case for referring the case to a Division Bench or to drop the case in limine. If the learned Single Judge finds a prima facie case for the contemnor being tried, then he has to refer the matter to a Division Bench. In these two cases, the learned Single Judge found that there was a prima facie case and then referred the matter to Division Bench.

(3.) Having perused the pleadings and considering the contentions raised and having noticed Rules 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 and 16 of the Contempt of Courts (High Court of Kerala) Rules, as relevant for adjudication, the Division Bench, consisting of Chief Justice N.K. Sodhi and Justice A.K. Basheer, held that, under Rule 9, the Division Bench, before whom the matter is placed after reference by the learned Single Judge in a civil contempt, is entitled to consider as to whether there exists a prima facie case for proceeding with contempt and then issuing notices to the respondents or to dismiss the contempt petition by dropping the proceedings. After holding so, the Division Bench considered the facts of each of the cases and was of the considered view that there was no case made out to proceed with the contempt and accordingly dropped the proceedings.