MANISHA Vs. ASOKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition complaining of contempt of Court. It has been filed with the consent of the Advocate-General given under S.15(1)(b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The petitioner alleges that the statement the contemnor-opposite party made before a Division Bench of this Court in connection with the hearing of Criminal Appeal No.382 of 1979 on 17-9-1981 to the effect that he had no confidence in the Bench constituted by the Judges named without disclosing any reason or material in support thereof amounted to contempt inasmuch as it scandalised or lowered the authority of the Court, interfered with the course of judicial proceedings or obstructed the administration of justice. In the appeal aforesaid the petitioner was appellant and the opposite party was respondent.

(2.) For proper appreciation of the charge of contempt of Court brought by the petitioner it is necessary to give the antecedent facts in some details. The petitioner filed a complaint in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate against the opposite party in 1975 under S.493 of the I.P.C. On 2-4-79 the opposite party was convicted by the learned Magistrate trying the case. The petitioner has given in details in her petition various steps taken by the opposite party in the said proceeding with a view, solely to delay the proceeding. The steps included moving revision petitions against orders passed by the learned Magistrate at various stages of the proceedings and obtaining adjournments. Opposite party filed appeal against the order of his conviction in the City Sessions Court, Calcutta. The Chief Judge, City Sessions Court after hearing the learned Advocates of the parties allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court. The petitioner filed an appeal against the appellate order of acquittal in the High Court which was admitted as Criminal Appeal No.388 of 1979. The appeal coming up in the list of Mr. Justice Borooah and Mr. Justice B.N. Maitra could not be heard because of repeated adjournments obtained by Mr. S.D. Banerjee, the learned advocate for the opposite party. The appeal later appeared in the list of the Bench consisting Mr. Justice N.C. Mukherjee and Mr. Justice Monoj Kumar Mukherjee, but the appeal was not fixed for hearing before the Bench because Mr. Justice Monoj Kumar Mukherjee in his capacity as advocate had taken up the brief of the petitioner at one stage. The appeal was assigned to the Bench presided over by Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sen. After a few months the said Bench ordered the appeal to go out of their list on account of their preoccuption with civil matters. The appeal was assigned to the criminal Bench presided over by Mr. Justice N.C. Mukherjee and Mr. Justice N.G. Chaudhuri. For some reasons Mr. Justice N.C. Mukherji declined to hear the appeal. The appeal was assigned to the Bench presided over by Mr. Justice B.N. Maitra and Mr. Justice Amitabha Dutta. Mr. Justice Maitra for some reasons declined to hear the appeal. The appeal was assigned to a Bench constituted by Mr. Justice S.M. Guha and Mr. Justice Amitabha Dutta, but Mr. Justice Dutta did not like to hear the appeal for some reasons. The appeal was ultimately assigned to the Bench constituted by Mr. Justice S.M. Guha and Mr. Justice N.G. Chaudhuri. Because of throat trouble of Mr. S.D. Banerjee, the learned advocate for the opposite party, the said Bench adjourned the appeal on 14-8-1981 to 4-9-1981 for fixing a date of hearing.

(3.) On 4-9-81 overruling the suggestion put forward by the learned advocate for the opposite party that the date of hearing be fixed sometime after the Puja vacation, the Bench consisting of Mr. Justice Guha and Mr. Justice Chaudhuri fixed 16, 17 and 18th Sept. 1981 for hearing of the appeal. The reasons for rejecting the suggestion of the learned advocate for the opposite party regarding the date was the possibility of Mr. Justice Guha being involved in certain matters resulting in delay in the hearing of the appeal. The petitioner alleged that the learned advocate of the opposite party named in the petition gave out that it would not be possible for any of them to appear on 16, 17 and 18-9-1981. In the list of 14-9-1981 the matter appeared as marked for hearing on 16-9-1981, but on 16-9-1981, the date scheduled for hearing the appeal disappeared from the list. The matter was mentioned at 2 p.m. by the counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Justice Guha observed in open Court that it was mysterious that the case was omitted from the list of 16-9-1981 though the same was printed in the list of 14-9-1981 and 15-9-1981. Mr. Justice Guha directed the appeal to be printed in the list for the next day, that is, on 17-9-1981 and gave out that he along with Mr. Justice Chaudhuri would sit on 17-9-1981 and begin hearing of the appeal.