(1.) THIS is an application for quashing proceedings of the Certificate Officer of Boudh in Certificate Case No. III -8/65 in which by order dated 10 -4 -67 the said Certificate Officer has found the petitioner to be liable to be committed under Section 478 Criminal Procedure Code for an offence under Section 228 I.P.C. and that he has also committed contempt of court by casting aspersions on the Certificate Officer to his integrity, and judiciousness.
(2.) THE background of this proceeding may be briefly stated. The petitioner is the Commercial Tax Officer Ganjam II Circle, Bhanjanagar. He assessed one Bhagaban Panda of Bhagiabahal to sales tax in exercise of his powers as Sales Tax Officer under the provisions of the Orissa Sales Tax Act of 1947. The assessee having defaulted to pay the tax, recourse was taken to certificate procedure under the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act for realisation of the same. The requisition was sent under Section 4 of the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act of 1962 (Act I of 1963) whereby the present certificate proceedings commenced. Subsequent steps followed. On receipt of the notice from the Certificate Officer the certificate -debtor filed his objection under Section 8 of the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act. The petitioner as the certificate -holder sent his comments and his opinion on all the objections advanced by the certificate -debtor by his letter dated 8 -7 -66 addressed to the Certificate Officer. This letter appears to have irritated the Certificate Officer because, according to him, it contained offensive expressions which are extremely impolite and highly derogatory to his prestige and cast serious reflection on his integrity and judicial capacity as an impartial institution. He was of opinion that he was a court within the meaning of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1952 and that the words used by the petitioner in his letter dated 8 -7 -66 amounted to Contempt of Court and also constituted an offence under Section 228 I.P.C. committed in relation to the certificate proceeding pending before him. He, therefore, issued a notice to the petitioner on 11 -1 -67 calling upon him to appear in person or through his pleader on 30 -1 -67 and to show cause why contempt proceeding will not be drawn up against him and why he will not be committed under Section 478 Criminal Procedure Code to stand his trial under Section 228 I.P.C. The Petitioner appeared and showed cause in writing. The Certificate Officer heard him and rejected his contentions and passed the impugned order which is now sought to be quashed.
(3.) THREE contentions have been raised. The first is that in the admitted facts and circumstances of the case, no offence under Section 228 I.P.C. can be said to have been made out. The second contention is that the Certificate Officer is not a court within the meaning of that term in the Contempt of Courts Act, and as such proceedings for contempt cannot be instituted against the petitioner even assuming that the latter by his actions injured the prestige and dignity of the Certificate Officer and cast serious reflection upon his rectitude and integrity. The third is that the petitioner's letter to the Certificate Officer containing the alleged insinuation against the impartiality of the officer are not really contemptuous in tenor. The letter merely contained the contentions on the question of law and fact as against the objections raised by the assessee before the Certificate Officer.