GOLCHHA ADVERTISING AGENCY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application filed on 8th September, 1987 by M/s. Golchha Advertising Agency, Nagpur, for initiating proceedings of contempt against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (the Act) for the alleged disobedience on 4th August, 1987 of the ad interim orders passed in Writ Petition No. 1443 of 1981 and Writ Petition 816 of 1982, was placed before us for admission on 13th January, 1989.

(2.) ON 10th January, 1987 this Court had issued notice before admission to ascertain facts and to show cause as to why proceedings of contempt should not be initiated. The respondents-the State of Maharashtra and the executive Engineer-filled submissions explaining the factual back ground and stoutly denying the allegations of disobedience of any order passed by this Court. They opposed initiation of proceedings of contempt on merits as well as on the ground of limitation. The objection on the ground of limitation is based on section 20th of the Act. Considering the plain language used therein and crystalized legal positions regarding basic approach to the law relating to contempt of Courts, it seems to us that the said objection has to be up held. Section 20 reads thus:

(3.) IT is of significance to note that a fixed period of 12 months for initiating proceedings has been newly introduced in the Act. No period was fixed in the old 1952 Act which has been repealed following the Sanyal Committee report made in 1963 accompanied by a draft Bill Which was altered on the basis of suggestions made by a Parliamentary Committee headed by Shri M. P. Bhargav in 1970. It has always been recognised that delay defeats the very object of law of contempt of Court. Previously Courts were empowered to decide in each case whether there was undue delay or not. Not that uncertainty has come to an end. Outer limit is statutorily fixed.