PITABASH SAHOO Vs. G R MOHANTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) :- We have heard Shri G. S. Rath, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Shri B. K. Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate.

(2.) Shri Rath submitted that the present being a civil contempt, as defined in Section 2 (b) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is to be heard and determined by a single Judge and if it would be heard and disposed of by a Division Bench, the aggrieved party would be deprived of the right of appeal to a Division Bench as provided in Section 19(1)(a) of the Act. We find sufficient force in this submission. Section 18 of the Act provides that a case of criminal contempt (criminal contempt is defined in Section 2(c)) shall be heard and determined by a Bench of not less than two Judges. Section 19(1) provides that an appeal shall lie as of right from the order or decision of a single Judge to a Bench of not less than two Judges of the Court and where the order or decision is that of a Bench, to the Supreme Court. A combined reading of the provisions of Sections 18(1) and 19(1) would show that the case of criminal contempt is to be heard and determined by a Division Bench whose order or decision is appealable in the Supreme Court and there is no specific mention as to who is to hear a case of civil contempt. If a case of civil contempt is heard and determined by a Division Bench an aggrieved party would be deprived of the right of appeal to a Division Bench of the Court which would be contrary to the scheme of Section 19(1)(a) which provides that an appeal shall lie as of right from the order or decision of a single Judge to a Division Bench. The right conferred under Section 19(1)(a) of appeal to a Division Bench of the Court is a substantive and vested right and in order to give effect to the said provision a case of civil contempt is to be heard and determined by a single Judge.

(3.) In the rules made by the High Court under Section 23 of the Act to regulate the contempt proceedings, there is no mention as to how a proceeding in respect of civil contempt would be disposed of. All cases of contempt, be it civil or criminal, are being placed before a Division Bench apparently keeping in view rule 6 of the aforesaid rules. Chapter III of the High Court Rules deals with jurisdiction of single Judges and Benches of the High Court. Rule 1 has enumerated different matters which may be heard and disposed of by a single Judge, one of the matters being any other application which under the rules is not expressly required to be made to a Bench of two or more Judges or to the Registrar (vide rule 1(x)(b) of Chapter III of the High Court Rules). A case of civil contempt having been not expressly required to be heard and disposed of by a Division Bench, in our considered opinion, such case is to be heard and disposed of by a single Judge.