IN RE: AJAY KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri Rajveer Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Auraiya (hereinafter referred to as the "Presiding Officer") vide reference dated 15.01.2005 placed on record the activities of Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocate (hereinafter referred to the "Contemnor"), shown in the court on 15.01.2005 which according to him, constitutes criminal contempt and, therefore, a request was made to take appropriate action against Contemnor. The reference was forwarded by District Judge, Auraiya vide endorsement dated 21.02.2005. He alleged that on 15.01.2005 at about 1.15 pm when the Presiding Officer was doing judicial work, the alleged Contemnor pressed upon him to decide application No. 131 of 2004. The Presiding Officer stated that Contemnor has shown non confidence in the integrity of Court and, therefore, he (Presiding Officer) has written to the District Judge, Auraiya for transfer of said application to some other Court. Hearing it the Contemnor started shouting in the open Court and threatened the Presiding Officer in various ways. The actual contents of the reference letter dated 15.01.2005 reads as under: <JUDIMG>588272-1</JUDIMG>

(2.) The Hon'ble Chief Justice has approved the matter to be placed on judicial side before the Bench dealing with criminal contempt on 02.09.2005 and thereafter the Court admitted and issued notice to Contemnor on 19.09.2005. The Contemnor put in appearance and raised various objections before the Court including that the contempt petition is not maintainable. He pleaded that as per Section 17 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1971") read with Rule 6 of the High Court Rules it was obligatory on the part of Court/office to have sent the documents including reference made by Subordinate Court. The notice which was served upon the Contemnor, he made endorsement on the back of notice that copy of order dated 20.09.2005 which was enclosed with notice communicated about termination of contempt proceedings, so referred against him, hence contempt proceedings cannot be initiated. The Court took notice that all the points can be considered after framing charge. Consequently, on 30.01.2008 the Court charged the Contemnor as under:

(3.) The order-sheet shows that on various occasions the Contemnor avoided and appeared only when non-bailable warrants were issued against him on 04.05.2015 and till then the Contemnor has not filed any reply to the charges framed against him. When enquired he sought further time which was granted and stop order was passed by the Court as under: