SAHAI A P SAHI A P SAHI SATENDRA KUMAR JAIN SATENDRA KUMAR JAIN SADHNA UPADHYAYA ADVOCATE Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant contemner, a practising lawyer of this Court who on an earlier occasion also held the office of the Secretary, Allahabad High Court Bar Association, has been charged for having committed ex-facie contempt by a learned Single Judge of this Court giving rise to this appeal. THE division bench hearing the appeal found several issues worth reference as a result whereof Hon'ble the Chief Justice constituted this Fuli Bench to hear and dispose of the same.

(2.) ASPECIFIC ora? prayer was made for deciding the question of maintainability of the instant appeal, which is also one of the questions referred. Itwas urged by the learned Counsel that the said question be decided before taking up the con-tempt matter itself. The prayer was accepted by us in view of the sequence of the " proceedings which we would prefer to mention at the out set, before traversing the specifics of the incident, and the arguments advanced thereon.

(3.) THE appellant appears to have been set at liberty on the same day i. e. 10. 12. 2007 and on the following day i. e. 11. 12. 2007, the appellant moved an application before the learned Single Judge tendering her apology. THE learned Single Judge passed orders thereon, placing the said application for consider action before the concerned Bench, as in his opinion once the matter had been sent before the appropriate bench, the application was also to be considered by the same bench. THE application appears to have been again taken up by the Division Bench hearing the instant appeal on which a detailed order was passed on 11. 12. 2007 itself, placing the matter before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constituting a Larger Bench of not less than five Hon'ble Judges to opine on the issues referred to therein, and the interim order was continued. THE order passed by the Division Bench dated 11. 12. 2007 pointedly referred guestions which in the opinionof the Division Bench, had arisen in viewof the incident which weresub-ject matter of contempt and also issues which emanated as a conseguence of the said incident, which were of genera? importance including the alleged unruly behaviour of a large number of lawyers who engaged themselves in a ruckus totally disrupting the proceedings of all the Courts.