(1.) This proceeding was directed to be registered vide order dated 15-10-2008 passed by a Division Bench of this Court under Section 15(2) of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on the basis of a memo sent by Additional Civil Judge Class II, Satna. Facts leading to registration of the case briefly stated are that Civil Suit No. 19-A/2007 was pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge Class-II, Satna. On 2-4-2008, the contemner was being cross-examined by Mr. Rajesh Chaturvedi, Counsel for the plaintiff. During the course of cross-examination, the contemner got excited and slapped the Counsel while standing in the witness box. By the time, the clerk of the Court and other staff tried to stop the contemner took out his footwear and hit the Counsel on his head with it. Thereupon, the Trial Court issued notice to the contemner to show cause as to why the proceeding for contempt be not initiated against him. The contemner submitted his reply on 2-5-2008, which was not found satisfactory. Thereupon, the Trial Court made a reference to the Registrar General of this Court and a Division Bench of this Court as statedvide order dated 15-10-2008 directed the proceeding to be registered under Section 15(2) of the Act.
(2.) The contemner filed reply, in which, it was stated that the Counsel for the plaintiff used filthy language and slapped the contemner, therefore, the contemner caught hand of the Counsel by way of self defence only. It was also stated that the case has been foisted upon the contemner at the instance of the Counsel for the plaintiff taking advantage of his position and power. It is further stated that the contemner has highest regards for the Court and he cannot dare to act in the manner alleged against the him and has tendered unconditional apology.
(3.) A Division Bench of this Court considered the reply filed on behalf of the contemner and after hearing the arguments of the Counsel for contemner, by order dated 10-9-2012 held that prima facie case for criminal contempt is made out and charge was framed against him. The District & Sessions Judge, Satna was directed to record evidence with regard to charge and submit report, pursuant to which, the evidence was recorded by the District & Sessions Judge, Satna. Thereafter, by order dated 9-7-2013 the copy of report was directed to be supplied to the contemner, and the contemner was granted liberty to submit an objection, if any. However, no objection was filed by the contemner.