BALRAJ SHARMA Vs. A K ANGURANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER being found, guilty of civil contempt of the court, the respondent -contemnor. Khurshid Ahmed Ganai the Director of School Education, Jammu, was directed to address arguments regarding the sentence to be awarded upon conviction by the Court vide order dated: 13 -5 -1992. He appeared in the court on 20 -5 -1992 and submitted unconditional apology, stating:

(2.) IT has been argued at length that in view of the fact that court directions have been complied with and the respondent Mr. Gani, has taken all .steps for the implementation of the Court order, he should not be awarded any punishment particularly when he has shown repentance and tendered unconditional apology placing himself at the mercy of the court. It has been noticed with concern by all the courts including the apex court, that tendency of non -compliance with the court directions has multiplied necessitating stern action for its curbing. However, the weapon of contempt of courts is resorted to with pain and in rare circumstances for the maintenance of confidence of the common man in the rule of law and dignity of the Court. The purpose of initiating contempt proceedings is primarily to see that the court directions are implemented and the initiation of such proceeding is not a retributive. Tendering of apology after conviction cannot ordinarily be accepted for declining a person of having purged the contempt. However, as the law is not retributive its lory can be maintained by showing and establishing the authority of the institution. Normally a person convicted of contempt of court is required to be plashed and sentenced yet, there may be exonerating circumstances requiring no further action in the form of punishment and sentence. The courts are expected and have normally acted with great circumspection making all allowance for error of judgment and the defects arising from invertrate practices and the procedure followed and in vogue in the bureaucratic set up of this country.

(3.) IT is acknowledged that courts have open heart, gracious head and clear vision without having ill -will against any officer or individual, unlike, the bureaucrates who have been provide to be narrow -minded, selfish and soff -contened. The purpose of the contempt proceedings having been achieved the court while awarding the punishment has to determine the conduct and persistence attitude of the contemner before passing an order of punishment. Keeping in view the post conviction conduct of the respondent -contemner which has been minutely gone into by me in the official files, his young age and future career, his unconditional apology tendered at the earliest and being persuaded by the judgments of court and various other High Courts reported in AIR 1991 SC 311, AIR 1969 SC 189, AIR 1957 MP 152, AIR 1953 Orissa 249, AIR 1969 Patna 70 AIR 1951 Cal 507 and 'AIR 1953 Cal 53, I have decided in my discretion not to sentence the respondent -contemner in this case. I however, express my extreme displeasure upon his conduct prior to his conviction and warn him to be careful in future with the hope that he will not permit the repetition of such a conduct in future and realising the magnonimity of law, would learn a lesson for his life - to show greatest respect and honour t0 the court directions as and when issued in the cases to be dealt with the decided by him.