STATE Vs. SANKAR CHARAN SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These proceedings relate to contempt of the Court of the Additional Munsiff of Cuttack alleged to have been committed by Shri S. S. Roy, a 1st Class Magistrate, and by Sri Sankar Charan Sahu, a Sub-inspector of Police. Original Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 11 of 1951 was started on the basis of a report submitted to this Court by the Additional Munsiff of Cuttack Sri B. K. Das. Original Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 14 of 1951 was started on a petition filed before this Court by M. S. Rao, a Senior Advocate of this Court. Both the cases refer to the same incident and consequently they have been heard analogously and will be governed by the same order.

(2.) Mr. M. S. Rao had obtained a decree in 1935 against one Hrudananda Sahu and the execution of that decree was pending in the Court of the Additional Munsiff (Second Munsiff) of Cuttack in Execution Case No. 18/258 of 1948/46. In that execution case a warrant of arrest under Order 21, Rule 18, C.P.C., was issued against the judgment-debtor Hrudananda Sahu on 14-10-1949, for the realisation of the balance of the decretal amount of Rs. 836/1/- and it was handed over to a process-server of the Munsif's Court named Brundaban Mohanty for execution. There was perhaps considerable difficulty in arresting the judgment-debtor in execution of the warrant and the decree-holder Mr. M. S. Rao appears to have carefully watched the movements of the judgmentdebtor with a view to give timely intimation to the Civil Court process-server for effecting his arrest. That opportunity presented itself on the 15th April 1950, when the judgment-debtor Hrudananda Sahu appeared as an accused in the Court of Mr. E. Pal. a 1st Class Magistrate of Cuttack, in Case No. 610, C- 1/144T/48. He was ordered to be released on bail at about 8 a.m. (morning sittings) by the Court; but presumably there was some delay in getting the bail bond duly executed. In the mean time, however, Mr. M. S. Rao noticed the presence of Hrudananda Sahu in the Criminal Court premises and after giving due intimation to the Civil Court process-server began to take necessary steps so as to facilitate Hrudananda Sahu's arrest after his departure from the Criminal Court. Hrudananda Sahu also noticed Mr. M. S. Rao in the Criminal Court premises and being apprehensive of his arrest filed a petition through his Advocate Mr. A. Das under Section 144, Criminal P.C., in the Court of Sri S. S. Ray, Magistrate 1st Class, for restraining the Civil Court process-server Brundaban Mohanti from arresting him and claiming immunity from arrest under Section 135, Civil P. C. The learned Magistrate heard Mr. A. Das in support of the petition and M. S. Rao against the petition. He then passed an order purporting to be under Section 144, Criminal P.C., restraining the Civil Court process-server Brindabana Mohanty from arresting Hrudananda Sahu till he reached his home. He further directed that the notice of the order under Section 144, Criminal P.C., should be served on Brudabana Mohanti under Section 134, Criminal P.C., (sic) at once. The Magistrate then left the place and when Hrudananda Sahu proceeded in his car to his home he was stopped on the road close to the Police Office at Cuttack. The Civil Court process-server Brundabana Mohanti met him there, showed him, the warrant and demanded payment of the sum mentioned in the warrant failing which he was to remain under arrest. The judgment-debtor pleaded for half an hour's time. In the meantime, a crowd collected there & a telephonic message was sent from the office of the Deputy Superintendent of police to the Sub-inspector of Police of Lalbag P. s. Sri Shankar Charan Sahu to come with a few constables to prevent breach of peace. Sri Shankar Charan Sahu at once went to the spot and found the judgment-debtor sitting in the car with the road blocked & the processserver Brundabana Mohanty standing close-by with the warrant in his possession. Till then the order under Section 144, Criminal P.C., passed by Sri S. S. Ray had not been served on the process-server. No formal notice as prescribed by Form No. XXI of Schedule V of the Criminal Procedure Code, containing the signature and seal of the Magistrate had, in fact, issued from his office. But the original record of the proceedings under Section 144. Criminal P.C., containing the order of the Magistrate was immediately produced before the S. I., by somebody on behalf of Hrudananda Sahu himself. The Sub- inspector of police then showed that order to the Civil Court process-server, got his signature on the order itself, dispersed the crowd and allowed Hrudananda Sahu to proceed in car. The net result of the action of the Sub-inspector of police was the release of the judgment-debtor from the custody of the Civil Court process-server and the facility afforded to him to reach his home thereby preventing the process-server from executing the process.

(3.) The Civil Court process-server then submitted a report to the Additional Munsiff of Cuttack. The decree-holder Mr. M. S. Rao also filed a petition before the same Munsiff for action under Section 186, I.P.C., and for reporting to the High Court for contempt of Court against the Sub-Inspector of Police. In that petition he alleged that the judgment-debtor Hrudananda Sahu was the fatherin- law of Sri Dinabandhu Sahu. an Advocate and a member of the Orissa Legislative Assembly, and suggested (though not expressly) that on account of influence of Sri Dinabandhu Sahu the Magistrate as well as the Sub-inspector of Police acted in this unusual manner obstructing the due execution of process by the Civil Court process-server. The learned Munsiff stated a Miscellaneous Case No. 107 of 1950 and after examining the Deputy Superintendent of Police and getting certain documents marked as exhibits forwarded his report to this Court along with important papers connected with the proceedings under Section 144, Criminal P.C., in the Court of Sri S. S. Roy and also copies of the depositions in a connected criminal case of the Sub-Inspector of Police Sri Shankar Charan Sahu and the judgment-debtor Hrudananda Sahu. The Munsiff, however, should have marked the aforesaid two depositions, the order under Section 144, Criminal P.C., the explanations submitted by the Magistrate to the A. D. M. Mr. P. K. Das and other papers as exhibits in his Miscellaneous Case No. 107 of 1950 before submitting the record to this Court for action. This is however a minor irregularity. All the papers on which the Munsiff and Mr. M. S. Rao have relied in support of the contempt proceedings were typed in the Paper Book and the opposite party were fully aware that those documents were being used against them in these proceedings. In this Court also we got the original petition and the order of Sri S. S. Roy under Section 144, Criminal P. C., marked as Ex. 1 though a copy of the same had been forwarded to this Court by the Munsiff himself.