STATE OF BIHAR Vs. RANGLAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ranglal Sharma, the opposite party, has appeared in person today to show cause why he should not be committed for contempt of court.

(2.) The facts are shortly these. On 10-7-1956, Ranglal Sharma, who is resident of Chandil within the district of Manbhum, handed over a closed envelope to the bench clerk of the District Judge of Manbhum Singhbhum, and the bench Clerk made over the envelope to the District Judge. On opening this envelope the District Judge found a letter addressed to him, dated 9-7-1956. This letter was signed by Ranglal Sharma and he described himself therein as the Managing General Secretary of an organisation called "Vishwa Mitrata Gram Udyog Sangh". The letter, which is in printed form in its major portion, described the object of the Sangh as being collection of fund, removal of unemployment. Social uplift, awakening of culture, uplift of Harijans, backward classes, aboriginals and females in villages through Sarvodya Samaj and establishment of world friendship and Ram Rajya. The subject-matter of the letter as described by Ranglal Sharma was regarding a public agitation. Ranglal Sharma gave himself some importance by purporting to state in that letter that whatever information which he was conveying to the District Judge was in the capacity of some officer of the Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi, for he stated that the letter was "according to India Government Circular No. 13235/, 262 S.P.E. 49-III dated 16-9-50 is sued by the Special Officer, Police Establishment, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi". It is now admitted that all this was entirely what has been called bogus as he had nothing to do with the Police Establishment of the Ministry of Home Affairs in the Govt. of India. The subject-matter of the letter was that there was a serious complaint against the then Subordinate Judge of Jamshedpur amongst the public, information regarding which he was sending to the District Judge. He complained that there was a complaint of black marketing and bribery. He named certain persons and included in that list the Subordinate Judge of Jamshedpur and alleged against them that they were taking undue advantage from the Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. as they were seeking employment, for their relatives, and that they were associated with the company in an illegal manner. It was further stated that there were many other complaints besides those which he was investigating and about which he would be informing the District Judge soon. He then stated : "There is a rumour that the Subordinate Judge has taken bribe of rupees two or three lakhs" and then the District Judge was informed that news about cheating the public of Jamshedpur by means of pairvi in cases, through brokers and black marketing and corruption indulged in by the Subordinate Judge were available. The District Judge was, therefore, requested to make an enquiry into the matter and help the public.

(3.) The District Judge addressed a communication to this Court to obtain directions from the Court. This Court informed the District Judge that if he was of the opinion that the Subordinate Judge had been scandalised and that action was necessary he could refer the matter under the Contempt of Courts Act. Thereafter the District Judge recommended to this Court that an action was called for against Ranglal Sharma under the Contempt of Courts Act. As the allegations made by Ranglal Sharma in the aforesaid letter addressed to him were false and unfounded on a consideration of this letter from the District Judge, the District Judge was directed in the first instance to draw up a proceeding calling upon Ranglal Sharma to show cause if he was the author of the letter containing the aforesaid allegations, against the Subordinate Judge and thereafter report for an action for contempt if he was not satisfied with the cause shown by Ranglal Sharma.