UPENDRA KUMAR JOSHI Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, a practising Advocate of this court, has been convicted under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10/ - in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one week. Some facts have to be stated in order to appreciate the point. The appellant was previously practising in the district Court of Bhagalpur and there he was involved in a criminal case under Ss. 379, 352 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code. He had come to this Court against the framing of the charge but that application was dismissed and there was a trial and while considering the question of sentence the learned Magistrate, by his order dated 12.4.1980, called for a report from the Probation Officer and against that the appellant moved this court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1849 of 1980 which was placed for admission before Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Mishra (as he then was) and notice was issued to the complainant on 22.4.1980. The matter was taken up by the Hon'ble Judge on 8.8.1980 but at the time of argument some disparaging statements were made by the appellant and, therefore, the learned Judge did not think it proper to hear the case and ordered it to be placed before another Bench. He also observed that he would have taken a serious view but he deliberately refrained from doing so. The case was thereafter placed before Hon'ble Justice R.P. Sinha (as he then was) on 3.9.1980. The case, as it appears, was argued before the lunch hours and also continued after that and the learned Judge was not inclined to admit the application and, thereafter, the appellant stated in the Court that the case should be transferred to other Court in presence of a number of lawyers. The application was dismissed and a proceeding of contempt of court was started against the appellant for making certain observations which amounted to contempt of court. Notice was issued to the appellant -contemner on 6.9.1980 and a show cause was filed on his behalf and the matter was placed before Hon'ble Justice R.P. Sinha, who, by his order dated 1.10.1980, ordered that this case may be placed before another Bench.

(2.) The case was placed before Uday Sinha, J. and appellant pleaded not guilty. Then the learned judge decided to take evidence of the lawyers who were present in the court room and they are Sri Kanhaya Prasad Verma, Ex -Government Advocate, Sri Arun Bihari Mathur, Sri Ashwini Kumar Rai, Sri Mahfooz Ahmad and Sri Pawan Kumar Joshi, All Advocates. All of them stated that the appellant argued his case at length and the case was dismissed and even after that the appellant stated before the court, that the case should be sent to another Bench. Sri Arun Bihari Mathur happened to be present in both the Courts when the appellant was arguing for admission. According to the evidence of those witnesses it is clear that the appellant had argued his case at length but the judge was not inclined to admit the application and then the appellant prayed that the case should be transferred to another Court. One witness Sri Vibhuti Pandey was also examined on behalf of the appellant but he was declared hostile. At the fag end of the case apology was tendered by the appellant which was not accepted by the learned Judge. After considering the evidence and other materials the learned single Judge held the appellant to be guilty and convicted and sentenced him as stated above. This appeal has been preferred under Sec. 19 of the Act.

(3.) Before the appeal was taken up a petition was filed on behalf of the appellant on 26.8.1983 with a prayer to call for the records of the criminal case which was pending against the appellant at Bhagalpur and also to stay the proceeding. The matter was placed before a Bench consisting of Hon'ble Justice B.S. Sinha and Hon'ble Justice R.N. Thakur. The petition was considered by their Lordships and the prayer was rejected. But, at the same time their Lordships issued a notice to show cause as to why proceeding of contempt of court should not be started against him for the statements made in the petition particularly with reference to sub -paragraphs (II) and (X) of paragraph 1 of the application. The appellant filed his show cause which was taken up by the same Bench on 26.3.1984 and it was ordered that since the main appeal was ready for hearing and was running in the daily cause list the show cause should also be considered along with the appeal. The case was placed before Bench consisting of Hon'ble Justice A.P. Sinha and Hon'ble Justice R.N. Thakur and it was ordered to be placed before another Bench in view of the fact that Hon'ble Justice R.N. Thakur was one of the Judge who had issued notice to this appellant. When the case was taken up before us a prayer was made by the appellant to place the matter before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice under Sec. 14 (2) of the Act which was rejected on 7.10.1985. Another prayer of the appellant that he wanted to examine more witnesses and file some documents was not pressed at the time of hearing.