STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. K SEETHARAMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suo motu proceeding for contempt was initiated against the respondent on the basis of the report made by the District Judge, Guntur of the happening in his Court on 22-9-1995. In initiating the proceedings, the contents of the copy of the letter addressed by the respondent to the Chairman of the Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh was also taken note of. It appears from the report of the District Judge that on 20-9-1995 at about 12.30 p.m. when the Sessions Judge had completed examination of witnesses in a Sessions case and was calling for other works, a junior advocate S. Anjaneyulu asked for adjournment in a complaint case under the Essential Commodities Act. The move was refused by the Sessions Judge since written arguments in the case had already been filed and one adjournment had also been earlier granted. In refusing the adjournment, the learned Sessions Judge observed that such adjournments would give rise to unnecessary, criticism and sending of petition against him. At the time the respondent, who is the Public Prosecutor, was present in the Court. The Sessions case in which he was appearing was already over by then. On the observation being made. by the Sessions Judge, he stood up and asked for clarification from the Sessions Judge as to why he was referring to sending of petitions. The Sessions Judge replied that it was the respondent who had sent petitions to the Honourable the Chief Justice without verifying with him about anything of the alleged utterances of the Sri D. Koteswara Rao in connection with impannelment of Public Prosecutors. He observed that in his service career, it was for the first time that he had received a petition of that nature. At this the respondent shouted in loud voice hurling challenges at the Sessions Judge to which the Sessions Judge also shouted back.

(2.) The District Judge in his report stated that realising the petition was not only mischievous but also motivated for extraneous reasons, he had started suspecting the respondents to have heavy stakes in the Public Prosecutor's post. According to the report, that was the real reason for the conduct exhibited by the respondent.

(3.) The proceeding being initiated and notice issued, the respondent has appeared and filed an affidavit stating that the occurrence had occurred in exchange of words resulting in sudden spurt of emotion as he happens to be a patient of blood pressure. The occurrence was without any motive or intention and he offers unconditional apology and begs to be relieved from the contempt proceedings.