PRAKASH SINGH Vs. ISHWAR SARAN SRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER-APPLICANT had filed Civil Misc. Writ petition No. 58016 of 2008, wherein this Court on 14. 11. 2008 passed following order:

(2.) THE petitioner-applicant's contention is that certified copy of the afore-quoted order was served on Sri Ishwar Saran Srivastava, Director General Medical and Health Services, U. P. at Lucknow on 18. 11. 2008, but till date no steps have been undertaken and the order passed by this Court has been flouted. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Three Cheers Entertainment (Pvt.) Ltd. vs. CESC Ltd. AIR SCW 2008 7951, has taken the view that purpose and object of contempt proceeding is only to see that order of court is complied with and not unnecessarily proceed against persons, as if they are ordinary petty criminals and for initiation of contempt proceeding, there has to be willful disobedience or contumacious conduct on the part of alleged contemnor. Relevant extract is being quoted below: "contempt of Court is a matter which deserves to be dealt with all seriousness. In Mriityunjoy Das and Anr. v. Sayed Hasibur Rahman and Ors. (Ors) (2001) 3 SCC739, this Court held:

(3.) IN Chhotu Ram v. Urbashi Gulati and Anr. (2001) 7 SCC 530, this Court held that a contempt of Court proceeding being quasi criminal in nature, the burden to prove would be upon the person who made such an allegation. A person cannot be sentenced on mere probability. Wilful disobedience and contumacious conduct is the basis on which a contemnor can be punished. Such a finding cannot be arrived at on ipsi dixit of the Court. It must be arrived at on the materials brought on record by the parties. Yet again in Anil Ratan Sarkar and Ors. v. Hirak Ghosh and Ors. (2002) (4) SCC 21, it was opined: