BHUPENDRA KUMAR SANADHYA Vs. BHUPENDRA SINGH CHUNDAWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant being the Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Udaipur has forwarded the instant contempt petition under Sec. 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with grave and disturbing allegations against the contemnor advocates who are Office Bearers and Members of the Bar Association, Udaipur. On 10/6/2022, the Presiding Officer was conducting proceedings of the Special Court dealing with highly sensitive child abuse offences. It appears that the Members of the Bar Association circulated a letter on the same date i.e., 10/6/2022 proposing to suspend the judicial work on account of suicide committed by a lawyer in Sikar. As per the complaint, while the proceedings of the Court were going on at about 10:20 AM, as many as 35 advocates including the six contemnors herein, entered into the Court raising slogans. The advocates, shouted at the policemen sitting in the Court and the witnesses in attendance to move out of the Court. However, when the police officials did not leave the Court, the advocates tried to force the issue and grappled with a constable named Karna Ram. Two more police officials named Devendra Singh and Rajesh Meena (ASI) tried to intervene but the lawyers continued to grapple with the Constable Karna Ram. In order to save the Constable from further harm at the hands of the lawyers, the Presiding Officer was compelled to send him to the PA Room via the dias. However, the lawyers followed the constable to the PA Room. The Constable Karna Ram bolted the door from inside but the lawyers started banging the doors of the PA Room. When they could not succeed in forcing the constable out, they left the Court room. The Presiding Officer got snapped photographs of the resultant chaos in the Court Room as a consequence of the ruckus created by the lawyers. A CD of video taken by a police employee was also prepared which forms a part of the record of this contempt petition.

(2.) The allegations levelled against the respondents contemnors are very serious and unquestionably, they not only obstructed the proceedings of the Court but also, assaulted a police constable on court duty inside the Court Room. The acts so alleged are uncondonable and reprehensible.

(3.) All the contemnors in their counter affidavits have constantly claimed that they were not directly or indirectly indulged in the incident but during the course of arguments, learned counsel Shri Maheshwari on instructions from the respondents contemnors, present in the Court, submitted that the incident as alleged in the contempt petition did happen and that the lawyers were acting in the heat of passion owing to the incident of suicide committed by their peer in the Revenue Court at Sikar. The respondents have offered unconditional apology and have assured that such incidents shall not be repeated in future.