SAMAR GHOSH Vs. SOMNATH CHAKRABORTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present proceeding in Contempt has been initiated on the basis of a petition filed by Samar Ghosh and 16 others, all Advocates practicing in the Judges' Court, Chinsurah, for an alleged contumacious conduct committed by the contemnor opposite party No. 1 Somnath Chakraborty, Sub-Inspector of Police who wrote out a poem "Kazir Bichar" which was published in a Bengali fortnightly magazine "Bhagirathi Express" on 16th Dec., 1985. It was contended that the contemnor opposite party No. 2 Pradeep Mukherjee who is the editor and publisher of the said magazine "Bhagirathi Express" also was guilty of contumacious conduct as editor and publisher of the said fortnightly "Bhagirathi Express" by publishing the same in the issue of said magazine "Bhagirathi Express" dt. 16th Dec 1985 thereby scandalising the court and the lawyers and lowering the dignity of the judicial system, as such, which amounted to an interference with the judicial process as well as administration of justice.

(2.) The facts in a brief nutshell are as follows :- Sri S. Mohanti was posted as Judge, Special Court under the Essential Commodities Act at Hooghly. There was no other judicial officer having surname "Mohanti" in the court of Chinsurah. The contemnor opposite party No. 1 Somnath Chakraborty was a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to District Enforcement Branch, Hooghly. In or about 1984 the said Somnath Chakraborty was the Officer-in-charge of Dadpur Police Station. One Tarun Ghosh and one Arun Ghosh were accused in a case under the Essential Commodities Act out of which Special Court Case No. 34/84 was registered in the Court of the Ld. Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act) Hooghly in which a charge was ultimately framed against one Arun Ghosh. Somnath Chakraborty was practically the de facto complainant in the case and he was also a witness for the prosecution. In compliance of the process issued by the Court, Somnath Chakraborty attended court on 20th March, 1985. On that date Arun Ghosh was sick and on the prayer of the defence lawyer, the Id. Special Judge granted him permission to sit inside the court room instead of placing him in the accused's dock. When Sri Chakraborty stepped in at the witness box, Sri S. Mohanty cautioned him for avoiding the process of Court. However Somnath Chakraborty was examined and cross-examined and then discharged. But before leaving the Court he had put an objection before the ld. Judge to the effect that the accused should have been allowed to be seated in the court room instead of being directed to stand in the accused's dock. However when he was apprised about the court's earlier permission in this regard, he left the court with utter dissatisfaction. The case however ended in an acquittal in favour of Arun Ghosh. In the judgement, the Id. Judge made certain observations to the following effect :-

(3.) After the judgement Arun Ghosh and Tarun Ghosh instituted a suit for defamation against Somnath Chakraborty praying for damages which was numbered as Money Suit No. 21 of 1985 in the Court of 1st Assistant District Judge, Chinaurah. Upon receipt of the summons and the copy of the plaint, Somnath Chakroborty became aware of the observations made by the ld. Special Judge, Shri S. Mohanty against him in course of the judgement. Thereafter the poem named "Kazir Bichar" was published in a local fortnightly magazine named "Bhagirathi Express" edited and published by the opposite party No. 2 on 16th Dec., 1985. Copy of the said magazine is annexed as annexure "C" to the contempt application. The name of the opposite party No. 1 was printed as author of the poem "Kazir Bichar" of the said magazine. The first four lines of the said poem (matter in vernacular omitted....Ed.) directly connects the ld. Special Judge Sri S. Mohanty inasmuch as said Sri Mohanty was the only judicial officer having surname Mohanty in the court of Chinsurah. This would also be confirmed from the 7th and 8th line which refers to the origin of Sri S. Mohanty who hails from the State of Orissa This would be further confirmed from the 5th and 6th line of the 3rd stanza (matter in vernacular omitted.... Ed) which had a practical relation with the physical appearance of the ld. Judge who was physically slim having a thin face with a dark complexion with spectacles...... The first two lines of the 2nd stanza (matter in vernacular omitted... Ed) tends to scandalise that the courts are prone to illegal gratification without any fear. While the first 4 lines tend to scandalise and lower the dignity of the court by referring that the learned Judge never commands the accused to the dock which has a direct reference to the case as referred to earlier, the first two lines of 3rd stanza namely (matter in vernacular omitted... Ed) indicates about rendezvous between the acquitted accused and the learned Judge with reference to the place of residence of the ld. Judge inasmuch as he resides in the locality of Baghbazar at Chandernagore. The 3rd and 4th line of the 2nd stanza viz. (matter in vernacular omitted Ed) is also aspersion against the lawyers and it tends to indicate an unholly alliance between the lawyers and the Presiding Officer of the Court.