STATE Vs. RESHI KUMAR KAUSHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY an order dated 17th of Feb. 1959 this Court issued a notice to the Respondent to show cause why proceedings for contempt should not be taken against him.

(2.) IT appears that the Respondent had made a speech in a public meeting held in Reasi town, District Jammu in which he had made some comments with respect to a pending case and had also uttered words scandalising the Sub -Judge at Reasi. P.W. 1 Sharif Hussain the Sub -Inspector of police in charge police station Reasi had taken down his speech in his diary and had sent a report to the Registrar High Court who after taking the opinion of the Advocate General forwarded the copy of the speech to the Deputy Registrar. The Deputy Registrar drew the attention of this Court to the aforesaid speech which formed the subject matter of the present proceedings. A notice to the Respondent in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 17 -2 -1959 was issued from the court on 21 -2 -1959. The Respondent appeared through Mr. Bhalgotra his counsel on 11th March, 1959 and prayed time to file his objections. The proceedings then continued and as the Respondent chose to contest the proceedings on facts, and both the parties desired to lead evidence in support of their respective allegations a full opportunity was given to them to adduce their respective evidence. We might further state that on 27 -4 -1959. that is long before the parties started their evidence, the Respondent was handed over the entire copy of the speech referred to above. Thereafter, he filed an affidavit dated 2 -12 -1959, and it was after this that the evidence started.

(3.) THE Respondent is the President of the Praja Parishad at Reasi. A meeting was held in connection with the death anniversary of Dr. Shayamma Prasad Mukerjee in Mohalla Chowk Chabutra Reasi, on 26th of June, 1958 in which a number of persons delivered speeches including the Respondent. According to the evidence the meeting started at about 9 P.M. and lasted till about midnight. The Respondent in course of his speech is alleged to have made three statements which are the subject matter of the Present proceedings. The first statement made be quoted thus