1996 Supreme(SC) 79

1996(1) Supreme 458
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.C. Agrawal & S. Saghir Ahmad, JJ.
In re. : M.P. Dwivedi and 6 others -Contemners
Suo Motu Contempt Petition No. 10 of 1996
In
W.P. (Civil) No. 239 of 1993
Decided on 11-1-1996

IMPORTANT POINT
Though the contempt notices issued against the contemners are discharged but subject to directions regarding disapproval of conduct of contemners 1 to 5, various Police Officers and contemners 7, JMIC and directions regarding placing the note of the said disapproval in the personal files of all of them Police & Judicial Officers should also be made aware of Supreme Court decisions especially in field of protection of basic human rights.

Headnote:(i) M.P. Police Regulations-Regulation 465(3)-Handcuffing of under trial prisioners opposed to construction of Sardar Sarovar Dam on river Narmada-Non-compliance of Regulation 465(3)-Notices issued to contemners to show cause-Affidavits filed-Handcuffing justified as prisioners resisted arrest and tried to run away and a large number of supporters came and there was strong possibility of their attempt to free them-Two cases under Section 307 I.P.C. were registered against accused persons-Whether said action of handcuffing which was not justified and which was in clear violation of law laid down in various Supreme Court decisions constitute contempt of this Court ?-Case of contemners 1 to 5 who are Police Officers-SP, SDO, Town Inspector, S.I. & Head Constable-Pleaded error of judgment that the accused persons were likely to escape and ignorance of law laid down by S.C. judgments and no department circulars-No wilful disobedience-Held we refrain from taking action to punish them for contempt of this Court. (Para 16)-What about handcuffing in violation of Regulation 465 ?-First two indirectly involved and contemners 3 to 5 directly involved.

Held : We, therefore, regard our disapproval of the conduct of all the five contemners Nos. 1 to 5 in this regard and direct that a note regarding the disapproval of their conduct by this Court be placed in the personal file of all of them. (Para 17)

Held also : The Chief Secretary to the Government of Madhya Pradesh is, therefore, directed to ensure that suitable steps are taken to amend the M.P. Police Regulations in the light of the law laid down by this Court in Prem Shankar Shukla (supra) and proper guidelines are issued for the guidance of the police personnel in this regard. The Law Department and the Police Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh shall take steps to ensure that the law laid down by this Court in the matter of protection of human rights of citizens as against actions by the police is brought to the notice of all Superintendents of Police in the Districts soon after the decision is given, by issuing necessary circulars in that regard and the responsibility is placed on the Superintendent of Police to ensure compliance with the said circulars by the subordinate police personnel under his charge. (Para 18)

(ii) Contempt of Supreme Court decisions-Contemner No. 6 Vinod Kumar SDM-Absent on day of incident due to leave-So notice against him discharged (Para 19)-Contemner 7 JMIC-Affidavits-Contemner given benefit of not having made alleged statement-But guilty of ignorance of law in Supreme Court judgments & M.P. Police Regulations.

Held : This is a serious lapse on the part of the contemner in the discharge of his duties as a judicial officer who is expected to ensure that the basis human rights of the citizens are not violated. Keeping in view that the contemner is a young judicial officer, we refrain from imposing punishment on him. We, however, record our strong disapproval of his conduct and direct that a note of this disapproval by this Court shall be kept in the personal file of the contemner. We also feel that judicial officers should be made aware from time to time of the law laid down by this Court and the High Court, more especially in connection with protection of basic human rights of the people and, for that purpose, short refresher courses may be conducted at regular intervals so that judicial officers are made aware about the developments in the law in the field. (Para 21)

Consequently held : In the result, the contempt notice issued against the contemners are discharged subject to the directions regarding disapproval of the conduct of contemners Nos. 1 to 5 and 7 and directions regarding placing the note of the said disapproval in the personal files of all of them. (Para 22)