STATE OF BIHAR Vs. SUNIL KUMAR PANDEY, MLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE would like to begin by reminding ourselves the wise words of the Supreme Court in the case of Special Reference (1965(1) SCR 413: The power to punish for contempt large as it is, must always be exercised cautiously, wisely and with circumspection. Frequent or indiscriminate use of this power in anger or irritation would not help to sustain the dignity of the Court, but may sometimes affect it adversely.

(2.) SUNIL Kumar Pandey is an elected member of the Bihar Legislative Assembly. He is accused in a large number of cases including Karakat P.S. case No. 8 of 1999 (sic 9 of 1999) registered under Section 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. His Counsel is unable to say the exact number of cases pending against him. While he was in judicial custody a production warrant was issued for his production in the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bikramganj on 25th of April, 2007. What had happened on that date is described in the report of the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas to the Director General of Police, Bihar Patna in its letter dated 28.4.2007. According to the report, when aforesaid Sunil Kumar Pandey reached near the main gate of the Court came across Sub Divisional Prosecution Officer. He caught hold of him and also misbehaved with him. The employees of the Civil Court tried to pacify him but he pushed them forcibly entered into the Chamber of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate and misbehaved with him. Escort party deputed forcibly took him out of his Chamber. Thereafter he entered into the Court room of another Judicial Officer, namely, Ramayan Ram.

(3.) THE District and Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram by its letter dated 30th of April, 2007 forwarded the letter of the Superintendent of Police, Rohtas addressed to the Director General of Police to this Court. The incident taking place in the Court was widely reported in the various Newspapers published from Capital. The Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate in whose Chamber the contemnor Sunil Kumar Pandey had entered had also submitted a report to this Court. In the report he has stated as follows: With respect I beg to say with sorrow that today on 25.4.2007 at 11.40 A.M. when I was performing my judicial work in Chamber, in the meantime, accused Sunil Pandey, who is facing trial in connection with G.R. No. 49/1999/T.R. No. 1670/2007 entered in my chamber at 11.40 A.M. in state of over drunkness with his guard and started creating disturbance in my chamber, abused, and threatened in the chamber, and showed his activity to assault me. In the meantime by the interference of staff, I could be saved. Later on by the help of staff and Guards he was forcibly removed from my Chamber. The aforesaid report of the District and Sessions Judge and that of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, led this Court to direct for initiating proceeding for criminal contempt in exercise of its suo moto power. On 29.1.2008 when the matter was taken up this Court directed the Counsel for the State to furnish names and particular of the persons who were members of the escort party entrusted to take contemnor Sunil Kumar Pandey to the Court.