SHARAD BANSILAL VAKIL Vs. SUO MOTU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE) This appeal has been directed against the order dated 24.2.2006 passed in Misc. Civil Application No. 47 of 2006 in Misc. Civil Application No. 27 of 206.

(2.) Brief facts, giving rise to this appeal, are as under: (1) On 17.2.2006, in one of the courts, mobile phone of the appellant, who is a senior advocate practising in this court, started ringing. The appellant, upon finding that his mobile phone had started ringing, switched off the phone while going out of the court room so as to see that the court is not disturbed. When the learned single Judge noticed that the phone of the appellant had started ringing in the court, he issued notice to the appellant calling upon him to show cause as to why he should not be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for ignoring the directions given by that court that nobody should bring his working mobile phone in the court so as to allow his mobile phone to ring. The notice was made returnable on 24.2.2006. It was also directed that the appellant should remain present in the court on that day. The said proceedings were registered as Misc. Civil Application No. 27 of 2006. (2) The appellant filed Misc. Civil Application No. 47 of 2006, which came up for hearing on 24.2.2006, under sec. 14(2) of the Act with the following prayers:

(3.) Learned Counsel Shri Mihir Thakore has appeared for the appellant, whereas learned counsel Shri J.N. Pardiwala has appeared as amicus curiae as, normally, in all matters wherein the High Court of Gujarat is a litigant, Shri Pardiwala represents the High Court.