JUDGMENT

RAY, C.J.I. :— This is an appeal under Section 19 (1) (b)of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, referred to as the Act against the order dated 20th August, 1975, of the High at Jabalpur convicting the appellant and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment till the rising of the Court under Section 4 (sic - S. 12(?) ) of the Act and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-. The High Court however accepted the apology of the appellant for the purpose of remitting the punishment under the proviso to Section 12 (1) of the Act and remitted the sentence and ordered the appellant to pay the paper book costs and to bear his own costs.

2. The appellant is a District Magistrate of District Rajnandgaon in Madhya Pradesh.

3. A detenu Vidya Bhus an Thakur challenged in the High Court by way of a habeas corpus petition the validity of his detention order passed by the appellant under Section 3 (1) (a) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971.

4. On 1st August, 1975, the High Court directed the production of the detnu in court on 8th August, 1975.

5. On 5th August, 1975, the appellant received a telegram from the office of the Advocate-General, Madhya Pradesh intimating the appellant the order of the High Court to produce the detenu Vidya Bhushan Thakur before the High Court on 8th August, 1975, in connection with the habeas corpus petition.

6. Immediately on the receipt of the telegram from the office of the Advocate-General the appellant communicated the same to the Superintendent. Central Jail Raipur directing him to send the detenu to Jabalpur under strong guard for his production before the High Court on 8th August, 1975. The order was communicated to the Superintendent, Central Jail Raipur on the same day and accordingly the Superintendent, sent the detenu on 6th August, 1975, at 5.35 p.m. to Jabalpur and thereafter the detenu was duly produced in Court on 8th August, 1975.

7. The State Government had passed an order under Section 268 of the Criminal Procedure Code which was published in the Official Gazette on 1st August, 1975. The appellant referred the matter to the Home Secretary for clarification of the notification vide a wireless message dated 6th August, 1975, as to whether the detenus under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act are to be produced before the High Court in connection with the habeas corpus petitions. The appellant also spoke to the Government Advocate on 6th August, 1975 and brought to his notice the above notification of the State Government. The Government Advocate informed the appellant on telephone that neither the Advocate-General nor the High Court had so far received a copy of the said notification. The appellant then informed the Government Advocate that he would be sending a copy of the said notification by wireless for information. The appellant despatched the wireless message to the Government Advocate at Advocate-Generals address quoting the notification as received from the Government.

8. The wireless message quoted the notification and the request of the appellant to the Advocate-General was as follows -

"In the light of above Government Notification he was requested to request the Court not to insist on the production of Vidya Bhus an Thakur as there is strong possibility of disturbance of public order if Vidya Bhus an Thakur is taken out from jail. Kindly inform the Government regarding the action taken."

9. On 6th August, 1975, after the telephonic conversation with the Government Advocate, the appellant again directed the Superintendent, Central Jail, Raipur, to produce the detenu before the High Court on the date of hearing and informed the Advocate-General that the detenu would be produced before the High Court and the detenu was in fact produced before the Court.

10. The High Court took the view that the wireless message dated 6th August, 1975, addressed to the Advocate-General with a copy to the Registrar of the High Court amounted to an expression by the appellant of his inability to obey the orde