RAJENDRA KUMAR SHARMA Vs. M.G. UPADHYAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is made for contempt against two lawyers and the wife of the applicant. The applicant says that the non -applicants had undertaken before this Court that they will produce the child before the Court on a given date i.e. 4.5.1993 as also on 17.5.93. According to him the child was not produced and, therefore, the non -applicants lawyers as also the wife have committed contempt. The Court's proceedings on 22.6.93 are as follows:

(2.) THE petitioner says that ultimately the revision application No. 110/93 in which the above order was passed was dismissed by saying that no useful purpose would be served by passing any orders in the revision petition, the same was rejected. In that revision application, I am told by the applicant that the contempt proceedings were not initiated by the Court, which means that the Court which passed the order do not feel that there was any contempt irrespective of the fact that the child was not produced inspite of the undertaking. The present application has been made on 13.5.94 for initiating contempt proceedings against the lawyers; Mr. M.G. Upadhyaya and Mr. Prakash Jain in addition to the petitioner's wife Anita.