SHIV PAL Vs. GURDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER innocence or bona fide intention can be pleaded as an absolute defence in an action against the person under the Contempt of Courts Act for committing civil contempt, is the short question that falls for consideration in this case.

(2.) LATE Shri Kehar Singh father of the present petitioner had purchased a plot in the abadi of village Lalana from one Ajmer Singh by means of a registered sale deed dated 28.3.1964. Mihan Singh and Gurdev Singh and encorached upon the said land in the year 1977 and had raised some construction.

(3.) THERE was no dispute between the parties till 19.9.1995. It is stated by the petitioners herein that respondents No. 1 and 5 to 9 are parties to the Regular Second Appeal. Respondents No. 2 to 4 are sons of respondent No. 1 Gurdev Singh while respondent Nos. 5 to 9 are sons of the deceased Mihan Singh. Respondents No. 10 and 12 are alleged to be the associates of these respondents No. 1 to 9. Respondents No. 13 and 14 are stated to be the masons while respondents No. 15 and 16 are the police officials who are stated to be abetting the contempt and in fact positively participated in disobedience of the order of the Court. It is further alleged that on 19.9.1995 the respondent after demolition of the existing structure had started constructing a new structure on the same land which is subject matter of dispute and was specifically covered by the order of status quo. On 19.9.1995, the petitioner, his brother and nephew went to the police station, requested the S.H.O. to take appropriate action upon producing certified copy/photo copy and see to it that the order of the Court was not flouted. The S.H.O. had admittedly sent two constables to the village on the same day upon seeing the copy of the order passed by the Court. It is alleged that these constables had seen the construction going on and even confirmed the factum of the above orders being passed by the High Court from the respondents. These constables asked the parties to come on 20.9.1995. The S.H.O. asked the parties to go to Deputy Superintendent of Police Shri Karan Singh respondent No. 15. In furtherance to this direction they went to respondent No. 15 and showed him the copy of the order dated 23.4.1981 passed by the High Court. The said respondent No. 15 abused the petitioners and their family members and threatened that the work of construction has to be completed and if they tried to stop, they would be involved in criminal case and he does not bother about the orders of the Court. It is further averred that he directed the S.H.O. to take them in illegal constody and beat them which was subsequently done by respondent No. 14. The S.H.O. and the Deputy Superintendent of Police permitted the said party to raise the construction. All this incident is stated to have been reported on 22.9.1995 itself to the Superintendent and the petitioners again went to the Deputy Inspector General of Police on 26.9.1995 and made even a representation in writing, the copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure P-2 to the petition. It is averred that all these respondents in connivance with each other and in fragrant violation of the orders of the Court, raised the new construction on the suit land which is subject matter of the appeal in intentional and wilful violation of the orders of the High Court dated 2.4.1981 and 23.4.1981. The new construction has been reflected in a photograph which has been annexed to this petition as Annexure P-3.