LOKANATH MISHRA AND Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four petitions have been filed alleging contempt on the part of opposite parties Nos. 2 to 11 in Original Criminal Misc. Case Nos. 273 of 1995, and 278 of 1995, 1 to 13 in Original Criminal Misc. Case No. 279 of 1995 and 4, 5 and 6 in Original Criminals Misc. Case No. 285 of 1995 in maliciously criticising an Honourable Judge of this Court in respect of a judicial order passed. As the controversy involved in these applications is similar, this judgment shall govern each one of them.

(2.) In Original Criminal Misc. Case No. 273 of 1995 petitioner is an Advocate and has alleged that the contemners - opposite party Nos. 2, 3, 4 , 5, 6 and 7 have committed contempt in the manner described hereinafter. According to petitioners the said opposite parties are members/office bearers of certain organisations who held a Press Conference at Cuttack and made contemptuous statements against the Hon'ble Judge. The said statements were published in the Oriya daily 'The Samaj' in its first edition on 7-7-1995. Opposite party Nos. 10 and 11 were the Editor and the Publisher of the said news paper, who have since left this world and in any event before their death they expressed unconditional apology. Opposite party Nos. 8 and 9 had not participated in the deliberations made in the Press Conference and therefore, no notice was issued to them. Original Criminal Misc. Case No. 278 of 1995 has been filed by a registered association of advocates, who are members of the Orissa High Court Bar Association, and are the petitioners. They have made similar allegations in respect of opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 and 10 and 11. Original Criminal Misc. Case No. 279 of 1995 has been filed by an Advocate of the Orissa High Court Bar. Opposite party Nos. 10 and 11 in other applications are opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 in this application. Opposite party Nos. 5 to 10 in this application are opposite party Nos. 2 to 7 in the aforementioned two applications. Additionally opposite party No. 13 has been impleaded for allegedly making certain contemptuous statements. But no steps for getting notice served on her has been taken by petitioner. Opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 are Editor and Publsiher of Oriya Daily 'The Samaj' for allegedly having published some statements which per se affected the dignity and honour of the Court. Petitioner in Original Criminal Misc. Case No. 278 of 1995 also filed Original Crl. Misc. Case No. 285 of 1995 wherein the Editor and the Publisher of the Oriya Daily 'The Samaj' and author of allegedly offending article have been impleaded as opposite party Nos. 4, 5 and 6.

(3.) Allegations in all these application are that the contemners have attempted to abuse and undermine dignity of a judicial order of this Court. It is highlighted that the statements/publication show an Honourable Judge and this Court in poor light. Allegations of corruption and succumbing to pressure have been made which per se amounts to contempt. According to them, show cause replies filed by the concerned contemnors try to justify their action. The persons who organised the Press Conference have taken the plea of reaching to an improper grant of bail. According to them, bail should not have been granted to the in laws of the alleged dowry tortured victim. They have raised question of dignity and honour of women. The Editor, the Publisher and the Author of the article published in the 'Sambad' have more or less tried to justify their action giving the colour of social requirement and freedom of press. Though they have tendered some sort of apology that has been done after justifying the publication and authorship. The matter was heard on several dates and on 6-1-1999 there was no appearance on behalf of the contemnors. When the matter was listed under the heading 'To be mentioned', Mr. Ashok Mohanty learned counsel appearing for the persons who organised the press conference reiterated the stand taken in the show cause reply. There was no appearance on the aforesaid dates by the Editor, the Publisher or the Author of the article as published in the Sambad. In the reply filed to the show cause earlier, it is stated that what was stated was the reaction of the Press to the grant of bail, by a learned Judge of this Court. The English translation of the news published in the daily 'Samaj' dated 7-7-1995 reads as follows :