SWARNAMAYI PANIGRAHI Vs. B NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE genesis of these contempt proceedings before us was an ordinary rent dispute between a landlord and a tenant in respect of certain lands in a certain village in an Inam estate at Berhampur in the district of Ganjam, primarily governed by the Madras Estates Land Act (Act I of 1908 ). The original Crl. Misc. Case No. 6 of 1955 relates to contempt proceedings. The connected writ petition being O. J. C. No. 190 of 1955, posted for hearing analogously with the said contempt matter, has since become infructuous and was not pressed and is therefore dismissed.

(2.) THE alleged contemners are one Shri Brundaban Nayak described in the records herein as betel-leaves merchant, near Railway Station, Berhampur (Ganjam) (hereinafter referred to as Shri Nayak) and Shri Balakrishna Rath, Advocate berhampur (hereinafter referred to as Shri Rath) and Shri N. M. Patnaik, Pleader, berhampur (hereinafter referred to as Shri Patnaik ).

(3.) THE charges against Shri Nayak were these: On May 19, 1955 Shri Nayak had filed before the Additional District Collector, Ganjam-Chatrapur, two transfer petitions, namely, M. Cs. Nos. 2 and 3 of 1955 and made some prejudicial statements to wit: "1. The lower court openly identified himself with the plaintiff Srimati swarnamayi Panigrahi and is so partial to her that no justice or impartial decision can be expected from him. 2. He has gone out of the course prescribed by law and has taken over the function of witness and court in himself in such a way that there is no parallel to it in the history of litigation in India; and 3. That the opposite party wields extraordinary influences in the State as she is the wife of Shri Lingaraj Panigrahi, Chief Justice of Orissa High court. It is being openly talked about that the conclusions are foregone. " on these statements, the charge against Shri Nayak was that they were calculated to undermine the prestige and dignity of the trial Court. The charge against the said Advocate Shri Rath and the pleader Shri Patnaik were that they ". . . . . . abetted Shri Brundaban Nayak aforesaid in making such unfounded and derogatory statements by accepting Vakalat on his behalf and filing the said petitions before the Addl. Collector, Chatrapur, on his behalf. " the charge against all the three alleged contemners was that such action amounted to contempt of the Court of the Suits Collector, Berhampur. Although the charge did not specifically allege contempt of the High Court, the learned counsel for the alleged contemners, in course of hearing before us, submitted that, if the offending passage in the transfer petitions could be construed as amounting to contempt of the High Court also --his arguments covered both in respect of alleged contempt of the lower court as also of the High Court.