PRAGATI MILLS LIMITED Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned Special Counsel for the High Court, Sri Vijay Bahadur Singh, learned Advocate General of the State of U.P. and Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned Counsel for the contemner. The reference of initiating the proceedings of criminal contempt against Sri Manoj Singh, Managing Director UPSIDC has been made by a Division Bench of this Court comprising Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J. and Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra, J. vide order dated 20.12.2013. In the reference order dated 20.12.2013 passed by the above mentioned Division Bench in writ C - No. 64720 of 2013, (M/s. Pragati Paper Mills Ltd. v. State of U.P. and two others). The reference order dated 20.12.2013 is being quoted below.

(2.) The letter of the Principal Secretary, Home, which is being relied upon by the said Managing Director, is annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit filed today. This letter apparently refers to the preliminary enquiry report submitted by the S.I.T. (reference para 2 of the said report).

(3.) Further, in paragraph 3 of the said letter of the Principal Secretary, Home, a reference has been made to the Anupurak Report submitted by the S.I.T. dated 2.2.2012, and thereafter a reference has also been made to another Anupurak Report dated 25.5.2011. It is stated in the same report that the Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 9.9.2013 had ordered for fresh look into the matter based on original documents because of the earlier report dated 17.4.2013 being based on Photostat copies, as has been admitted by the Managing Director himself in paragraph 5 of his first affidavit. It is, therefore, writ large on the record that the Managing Director was all along aware that the preliminary enquiry reports and the Anupurak Reports submitted by the S.I.T. had not been accepted by the High Court and in Contempt Petition No. 1809 of 2013, a direction was issued for enquiry on the basis of the original documents.