MIRZA SALEEM AHMAD BEIG Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Violation of the judicial orders is not a disrespect to the person but to the system as a whole and if allowed to go unchecked erosion of the faith of the people in the rule of law is the fall out, therefore, the High Court cannot afford to maintain dead silence but has to deal with the contumacious approach and act of the authority howsoever high he/she or they may be and the measures to restore the majesty of law becomes a necessity as has been done by the learned Single Judge by taking suo moto cognizance in a writ petition filed by one of the contemnors herein seeking quashing of warrants issued by the learned Sessions Judge Poonch because of failure to appear in pursuance of summons besides the notice requiring the contemnors to show cause, if any, against initiation of contempt proceedings in a Robkar arising out of the refusal by one Shri Saleem Ahmad Beig, the then Superintendent, Central Jail, Jammu to comply with the direction of the learned Sessions Judge requiring him to admit the accused in the Central Jail Jammu followed by a false statement that the accused was not brought to the jail. Amazingly the Director General Prisons Shri M. K. Mohanty when came to know about the directions of the learned Sessions Judge instead of reprimanding the Superintendent, assumed the supervisory powers over the learned Sessions Judge unto himself and wrote a letter to him through his Staff Officer for exemption of the Superintendent Central Jail from personal appearance.

(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record, examination whereof leads us to an irresistible conclusion that both these officers appear to be unmindful of the legal position that the deliberate disobedience of the orders of the Judicial officers is not only a reprehensible act but amounts to abuse of the process of the Court and interference in the administration of justice. The impression, if any, that orders of the subordinate Courts can be flouted must be dispelled and we make it clear that the High Court has inherent jurisdiction as Court of record to punish any person for contempt of subordinate Court as of the High Court itself. In that background there is no place for daring experiences of the officers to impair due course of judicial process before the Courts subordinate to the High Court.

(3.) REVERTING to the conduct of the contemnors herein, the material available renders them liable to punishment but their unconditional apology comes to their rescue which is sought to be substantiated by reference to the events reflected in the file revealing that they were remorseful from the very beginning and on top of all our satisfaction that they have expressed sincere regrets while throwing themselves at the mercy of the Court besides unconditional apology on affidavit. Situated thus, unconditional apology is accepted. Rule discharged. Contempt/Robkar shall stand settled. LPA dismissed along with CMPs.