STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. KAMAL NARAYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The proceeding before us is the apparition of the three contempt cases in Re : Kamal Narain Singh, referred to above. Having emerged from the graveyard in which the composite corpus of the three cases were buried with contemner's comeuppance in each of the three cases disposed of by a common judgment dated 28-5-1999, the ghost is chasing two Advocates namely Sri V. C. Mishra, Senior Advocate and his Advocate son Sri Vivek Mishra, besides some officials of the Copying Section of this Court and the contemner Kamal Narain Singh himself by using the vehicle of contempt of Court jurisdiction of this Court. The proceeding, it appears, has been initiated as a suo motu review by the Bench which had disposed of the contempt cases as aforestated. It is neither necessary nor desirable to speak of the circumstances under which the proceeding was withdrawn from the concerned Bench and placed before this Bench for disposal.

(2.) It so happened that one Kamal Narain Singh filed a writ petition being Criminal Misc. Writ Petition 91 of 1998 for quashing of the first information report in Case Crime No. 376 of 1997 registered against him under Section 3(1) of the U. P. Gangsters and Anti Social Activities Act, 1986, P. S. Mohammadabad, District Farrukhabad on 30-12-1997. The said writ petition was grounded on the allegations that the petitioner therein happened to be a political worker belonging to Samajwadi Party and the case crime aforestated was registered against him at the instance of members belonging to the B.J.P.-ruling party. In support of his contention that he belonged to Samajwadi party the petitioner Kamal Narain Singh placed reliance on certain documents which purported to have been issued under the signature of Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav, the National President of Samajwadi Party. The Court found the documents to be forged and fictitious and accordingly dismissed the writ petition vide judgment and order dated 11-2-1998. Criminal Contempt Case No. 17 of 1998 came to be registered against Kamal Narain Singh for his having produced the "forged and fictitious document for the purpose of obtaining a Rule". Relevant portion of the order dated 11-2-1998 is quoted below : "Since the petitioner has produced before us a forged and fictitious document to his knowledge for the purpose of obtaining a Rule, we are of the view that he has committed not only contempt of this Court but also offence punishable under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code. Issue notice to him as to why appropriate orders in that regard be not passed against him. Since Mr. Katiyar learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has instructions only to appear in the case which has been dismissed, let office issue a notice to the petitioner on the address given in the writ petition and the supplementary affidavit making the Rule returnable on 25/03/1998. The notice to be registered as a separate criminal contempt case. Sd/- B. K. Ray, J. Sd/- P. K. Jain, J."

(3.) The contemner Kamal Narain Singh did not appear in pursuant to Court's order dated 11-2-1998. However, on 15-4-1998 Sri V. C. Mishra, Senior Advocate and Sri Vivek Mishra, Advocate, put in appearance for the contemner Kamal Narain Singh and submitted that since the contemner had not been served with the notice, he could not know if he had to appear personally before the Court. The case was adjourned to 28-4-1998 awaiting the appearance of the contemner and for the reasons recorded in the order dated 15-4-1998, the Court directed that another Criminal Contempt Case be registered against the contemner. Relevant part of the order reads as under :