JAGIR SINGH Vs. GRAM PANCHAYAT RAIPUR KALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question pristinely legal, has been raised in this petition for revision as to whether the Gram Panchayat, exercising criminal judicial functions can convict a person for its contempt under Section 79 of the Gram Panchayat Act read with Section 345, Criminal Procedure Code, on a day subsequent to the day it takes cognizance of the offence.

(2.) On 15-4-1979, the Gram Panchayat of village Raipur Kalan, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar was in seisin of a criminal complaint under Sections 504/323, Indian Penal Code, against the petitioner. The petitioner who was participating therein as the accused, passed insulting and abusive remarks against the Panchayat using therein filthy and a obscene language. Seemingly, the proceedings in that complaint were adjourned and a notice was issued to the petitioner for offence under Section 79(1) of the Gram Panchayat Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). In the said notice, he was required to show cause by being present before the Panchayat on 22-4-1979 as to why a sentence of fine be no imposed on him for his having committed the contempt of the Panchayat by using filthy and obscene language, lowering its dignity. The petitioner attempted so, but finally confessed his guilt and regretted his insolvent behaviour. The Gram Panchayat then, vide order dated 22-4-1979, convicted the petitioner under Section 79(1) of the Act and imposed on him a fine of Rs. 50/-. The petitioner preferred a revision petition before the judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kharar, under Section 51 of the said Act and raised a number of points therein, but the same was dismissed on 29-1-1980. Patently, the point now sought to be raised was not raised before the learned judicial Magistrate. And now the petitioner for the first time has raised the legal question posed in the opening part of this judgment, for consideration of this court in this petition preferred under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) Section 79 of the Act is in the following terms: 79 Contempt of Court: - (1) The provisions of Sections 345 and 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 shall apply to judicial proceedings under this Act; Provided that the fine imposed for contempt of court shall not exceed one hundred rupees. it would now be apt to notice the relevant abstracts from Sections 345 and 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 345. Procedure in certain cases of contempt: - (1) When any such offence as is described in Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code is committed in the view or presence of any civil, Criminal or Revenue Court, the court may cause the offender to be detained in custody and may, at any time before the rising of the court on the same day, take cognizance of the offence and, after giving the offender a reasonable opportunity of showing cause why he should not be punished under this section, sentence the offender to fine not exceeding two hundred rupees. 346. Procedure where court considers that case should not be dealt with under Section 345: - (1) If the court in any case considers that a person accused of any of the offences referred to in Section 345 or such court is for any other reason of opinion that the case should not be disposed of under Section 345, such court, after recording the facts constituting the offence and the statement of the accused as herein before provided, may forward the case to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the same It is plain from the language of Section 345, Criminal Procedure Code, that in Proceedings thereunder cognizance of the offence has to be taken by the court before the rising of the court. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the proceedings thereunder have also to be finalized on that very day and cannot be deferred to be heard for a future date. To be precise, the objection is that the proceedings could have been initiated on 15-4-1979, and they had to be finalized on that very day, and in no case could they be postponed to be taken up on 22-4-1979. The learned counsel further contends that in this; manner the panchayat having failed to employ section 345 Criminal Procedure Code, the only course open to it was to initiate action under Section 346, Criminal Procedure Code.