RAJESH KUMAR TIWARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application by petitioners has been filed for initiating Contempt of Court proceeding against Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 for wilfully and deliberately violating the order dated 2-12-1997 passed by this Court in Cr. Misc. Mo 20398 of 1997.

(2.) The case of petitioners is that they were made accused in Dumka Sadar Police Station Case No. 97 of 1997 registered under Sections 406, 420, 120-B, Indian Penal Code and they filed anticipatory bail application before this Court which was numbered as Cr. Misc. No. 20398 of 1997 and this application was heard on 2-12-1997 by a Bench of this Court (since retired) and the Court was pleased to issue notice to informant of aforesaid case after adding him as Opposite Party No. 2 in Cr. Misc. 20398/97 and it was further pleased to order that in the meantime, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners (Annexure-1). On 9-12-1997, petitioners filed an application before the Court below annexing the photo copy of order dated 2-12-1997 passed by this Court. On 10-12-1997, the order dated 2-12-1997 passed by this Court was received by Opposite Party No. 2 who was at that time posted as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dumka and he was pleased to order that the aforesaid order be sent to Officer-in-charge, Dumka Town Police Station for information (Annexure-2). According to petitioners, the aforesaid facts show that the concerned Court and the Officer-in-charge of Town Police Station, Dumka were aware of the order dated 2-12-1997 passed by this Court but inspite of this order, Opposite Party No. 3, who was the Investigating Officer of the case, filed an application on 27-11 -1998 in the Court of Opposite Party No. 2 for issuance of processes under Section 83, Code of Criminal Procedure (Annexure-3) and Opposite Party No. 2 on 22-12-1998 passed orders for issuing processes against the petitioners (Annexure-4). On 13-1-1999, Investigating Officer complied the processes issued under Section 83, Code of Criminal Procedure and attached the properties of petitioners. According to petitioners, they are cousins to each other and they were residing in the same house at the time of attachment The further case of petitioners is that on 18-2-1999, their application for anticipatory bail was finally allowed by this Court (Annexure-5). The case of petitioners is that inspite of order dated 2-12-1997 for not taking coercive steps against the petitioners, Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 violated the direction of this Court and they are liable for Contempt of Court proceeding.

(3.) Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 have appeared and filed their replies to show cause notice issued to them.