Judgment

SIKRI, CJI.: - This is a petition under Article 129 of the Constitution of India by Shri C. K. Daphtary and three other Advocates bringing to our notice the alleged contempt of this Court committed by the respondents (1) O. P. Gupta, (2) Rising Sun Press, Delhi, through its proprietor, and (3) M/s. Kanak Book Depot. Respondent No. 3 - Kanak Book Depot - has not been traced. Respondent No. 1, O. P. Gupta, appeared in person, and the proprietor of the Rising Sun Press, Mela Ram, also appeared in person.

2. In the Petition it is stated that Civil Appeal NQ 1731 of 1967 was flied in this Court by the State of U. P. against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad whereby the High Court had held that the order of dismissal from service passed against respondent NQ 1, O. P. Gupta, was invalid. This appeal came up for hearing before this Court on various occasions and was ultimately heard by a Bench consisting of Shah, J., as he then was, and Hegde, J., on October 15, 1969 and October 16, 1969 (and, according to respondent No. I, also on October 17, 1969). It appears that the appeal was first heard on February 22, 1969 by Hidayatullah, C. J., and another Hon ble Judge, but later on it was heard, as already stated, by Shah and Hegde, JJ., and the judgment was delivered on October 28, 1969 by Hegde, J.

3. It is further stated in the petition that respondent No. 1 "with the deliberate design of bringing into disrepute and scandalising this Hon ble Court, wrote and got printed and published, by and through Respondent No. 2, a pamphlet which though ostensibly meant for the convenient use of members of Parliament was actually widely circulated and was made available for sale at M/s Kanak Book Depot, P. O. Ramsanehi Ghat, Distt. Barabanki U. P., Respondent No. 3". It is also stated that "the said pamphlet was, as the petitioners believe, sold or offered for sale to the public by Respondent No. 3".

4. It is further stated in the petition that the pamphlet disparages and brings into contempt the authority of this Hon ble Court and tends to weaken the confidence of the people in it and in any event has the tendency and object of so doing". It is submitted that the pamphlet "by attacking Hon ble Mr. Justice J. C. Shah and Hon ble Mr. Justice Hegde, while acting in their judicial capacity scandalises and brings into disrepute this Hon ble Court and is clearly contempt of this Hon ble Court"

5. In para 7 of the petition certain passages from the pamphlet were extracted. It is necessary to reproduce these paras in order to show the nature and content of the scandalous remarks made against Mr. Justice Shah and Mr. Justice Hegde.

"Moreover, having wrongly persisted in hearing the case, he delivered a demonstrably dishonest judgment which cannot fail to show to any discerning person that he did so only to feed fat his prejudice and bias. He has gone to the extent of writing total falsehoods in the judgment in the defiant belief that there is none to took into and scrutinise his judgments. His action is highly condemnable and derogatory of a man in his position".

"As this enquiry proceeds hundreds of similar other instances of his misbehaviour are bound to come to light as he appears to be in the habit of being influenced by extra judicial considerations and of victimising the disliked party through dishonest means".

"In view of the clear admission by the U. P. Government that the file had never gone to the Governor at all, there was nothing on merits for that Government to file an appeal but still the U. P. Government filed an appeal in the SC in the hope that they may be able to influence the judgment and get a wrong decision in their favour. They thought of Shri J. C. Shah, Judge of the SC, in this connection".

"So even while the matter remained pending in the High Court they moved for ex parte ad interim stay in the SC This was managed to be heard by Shri J. C. Shah and another. Shri J. C. Shah at once ordered stay not only of the balance dec