R. MURUGESAN Vs. THIRU. P. CHELLADURAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . Murugesan, party -in -person, has filed the present Contempt Petition Sr. No. 4178 of 2015, to punish the learned District Munsif -cum -Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam. In the supporting affidavit, he has submitted that Crl.R.C. No. 1262 of 2012, filed in this Court, to set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P. No. 4334 of 2012, dated 24.08.2012, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam, was allowed on 21.03.2013, directing the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam, to prefer a complaint, against the respondent in the said revision petition and to act in accordance with Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. After receiving the copy of the said order, dated 21.03.2013, the respondent herein has taken the case on file, and assigned number as C.C. No. 138 of 2013.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he has orally represented before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam that he would file a written complaint against her and to transfer the case in C.C. No. 138 of 2013. He has further submitted that his wife/respondent in Crl.R.C. No. 1262 of 2012, has preferred SLP. No. 26883 of 2013, against the order made in the said revision petition, before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that the same was dismissed on 13.01.2014. He has filed a memo on 10.10.2014, informing the respondent herein, to prefer a complaint and to transfer C.C. No. 138 of 2013, as per Section 195 and 340 Cr.P.C.

(3.) IT is the contention of the petitioner that Section 16 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, recognises contempt committed by the Court. He has further submitted that negligence in performance of judicial duty, in terms of the directions of this Court, would attract the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and that therefore, the respondent is amenable to contempt of this Court. He has also submitted that immunity cannot be claimed, under the provisions of the Judicial Officers' Protection Act, 1850. In this context, he referred to the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and also relied a decision of this Court in Boradkanta Mishra v. Bhimsen Dixit reported in : AIR 1972 SC 2466.