CHAMAN LAL GOYAL Vs. SHILPI GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS contempt proceedings are initiated by Chaman Lal Goel, father of the complainant Meenakshi, who was appointed as Special Public Prosecutor to prosecute the criminal proceedings before the trial Court.

(2.) THE 6 th respondent Alok Garg and 7th respondent Arti Garg moved a petition before this Court invoking the provisions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the charge framed as against them by the Judicial Magistrate I Class, Chandigarh on 26.9.1996. This Court vide order dated 9.5.1997 dismissed the above petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. as withdrawn but the appearance of 7th respondent Arti Garg before the learned Judicial Magistrate during the course of trial was exempted but a direction was issued by this Court that she should appear before the Judicial Magistrate at the time of recording of her statement under Section 313 Cr. P.C. and also on the pronouncement of the final order.

(3.) THERE is no dispute to the fact that all the accused remained present before the trial Court to put forth their plea under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in connection with incriminating circumstances brought to their individual notice. But the respondents 2 to 7 were not present; however, respondents 8 and 9 alone were present at the time when the judgment of acquittal was recorded by the trial Court.